A while ago, when that movie I Am Legend was coming out, I remember reading some of the complaints about the casting of Will Smith. Some just didn't like him as an actor, but others didn't think he would fit because he was black.

I honestly felt that he would be 100% equivalent to any white American casted in the role, and I had no problem with it.

That got me thinking though. If they had casted an American of hispanic or asian origin, it would have seemed absolutely ridiculous to me. With this election....Obama seems like such a natural American candidate. Again, I imagined if he were asian or hispanic, and it just didn't seem "right" to me.

Now, I gave this some thought, and I think there are either two explanations for why I don't see Asians and Hispanics as being as "American" as a black or white person.

1) I'm black, and as a black American, my experience and upbringing has given me something of a "black and white" outlook.

or

2) In my experience, most hispanics identify with their country of origin (usually Mexico) much more than America. The language barrier and lack of prominent hispanic faces is probably another big factor. With Asians it is often the same case. There are many that have become very well-assimilated, but it seems they have almost no representation in media and politics. We know some Asians in our school or work places, and that's it. Collectively, they're very shy. That's in contrast to Hispanics, who are "loud", yet in such a way that emphasizes their foreign origins.

I'm leaning more toward option 2. Even if I do sort of see America as being "black and white", I think there is an objective difference between how integrated and represented black Americans are, compared to Asian and Hispanic Americans. There's also the fact that black Americans were in America for as long as whites, and have absolutely no other home. (The same would technically hold true for Native Americans, though since most of them were wiped out, they never really had a foothold in the culture that dominated this country.)

Also: For those of you who are against Obama on ethnic grounds, is it because of an actual racist complex, or because you don't feel a black person is representative of an "American"?

Yeah I think your second point is the case. Hispanics and Asians in general are too attached to their place of origin. Their language, culture, etc. is what is preventing them from assimilating. In the next generation I think you'll be seeing alot more of those types of people in high positions.

O yeah and your thing on Obama. I could see being against him on ethnic grounds, not for the fact I think black people are "inferior" or anything, but that I think the main reason he got so big is the sole fact he is black. Honestly, he hasn't really done much more then represented a perfect image of a charismatic, intelligent black man.

What if a hispanic american has for example descended from LA's original Spanish settlers? He's just as American in that case as blacks.

That with it not being "right", that's your racist instinct kicking in.

Also, most blacks identify with America yes, however most do not identify with America's current political and social systems/status. Therefor, they are not representative of modern America.

What if a hispanic american has for example descended from LA's original Spanish settlers? He's just as American in that case as blacks.

That with it not being "right", that's your racist instinct kicking in.

The issue is that the majority of the hispanic population still holds strong ties to their non-American origins. There are exceptions of course, but in general, they identify more with Mexico than this country. Furthermore, as I said, they don't have much representation in national politics and entertainment, unless it's specifically directed toward their communities. The lack of assimilation is their biggest problem.

Lastly, my view certainly wouldn't be racist. It's not even prejudiced. If anything you could describe it as nationalist, but...frankly, all such labels are fairly unrelated to this topic, and ultimately a distraction.


Also, most blacks identify with America yes, however most do not identify with America's current political and social systems/status. Therefor, they are not representative of modern America.

We don't "identify with social systems/status"? What the hell does that even mean? Just because a community of people has certain needs and concerns (mainly focused on poverty and education), that doesn't mean they are not representative of the country.

Could you please tell me what you think an "American" is? Do you know how many blacks, mexicans, asians, and whites are assimilated into sub-cultures within America that do not identify with any American so-called values? For example, the gangsta\rap culture?

Could you please tell me what you think an "American" is? Do you know how many blacks, mexicans, asians, and whites are assimilated into sub-cultures within America that do not identify with any American so-called values? For example, the gangsta\rap culture?

This thread isn't meant to suggest that a Mexican-American or Chinese-American is any less of a citizen than anyone else. If that's what you gathered from my post, I strongly encourage that you re-read it.

This is mainly about people who truly define themselves as American, and who are assimilated well enough that they could be outwardly identified as American.

If you take a look at the mentality of many Mexican-Americans, they tend to view themselves as Mexicans with American citizenship (well, assuming they aren't illegals), as opposed to Americans. Even people that are 2nd or 3rd generation still have that mentality, and that's the distinction I am discussing.

With the Asian community (ie. mainly Koreans and Chinese), I find that they generally are too introverted, and basically just "do their own thing" while keeping quiet. We all see and know many Asians, but I think generally they end up sticking to their own culture far too much. And perhaps due to just how large the cultural and physical differences are, we tend to reject them to some extent as well. I'd be curious to get an opinion from an Asian person.

America is a universal people's nation. Race has nothing to do with how American you are. End of story, Nigger.

America is a universal people's nation. Race has nothing to do with how American you are. End of story, Nigger.

You should learn to read, you stupid fuck. Race has nothing to do with this topic.

i understand what youre trying to say. i do reckon that a black or white dude would look normal when classifying the average american. i dunno, im australian, so i dont know much about you guys, but pretty much all the films and tv shows depict americans as either black or white, so thats the idea that has been burned into my mind. you dont see many sitcoms/films with hispanics and even fewer asians

so i would say its because of the media

The issue is that the majority of the hispanic population still holds strong ties to their non-American origins. There are exceptions of course, but in general, they identify more with Mexico than this country. Furthermore, as I said, they don't have much representation in national politics and entertainment, unless it's specifically directed toward their communities. The lack of assimilation is their biggest problem.

There is also a lack of assimilation among negroes. However, the negro sub-culture has yes indeed been developed in America, but it is generally not considered representative of America. Just like Mexican or Chineese culture. And if you disagree, show me statistics showing that more negroes are part of American culture (not sub-culture) then Asians or Hispanics. People generally don't elect people with ties to their own culture or sub-culture. We wouldn't elect an emo. We wouldn't elect a hippy. We wouldn't elect a nigger (nigger being the sub-culture type negro).

You should learn to read, you stupid fuck. Race has nothing to do with this topic.

I thought his comment was relevant and funny as hell. If race has nothing to do with this thread then why is it even mentioned. Race goes hand in hand with culture my friend. At least mostly; you may have a white man that wants to be a true native american or something else of that sort. But of course he is still white. But, yes, to answer your question, they are American if they have been born here or have attained citizenship. But as ThePrince said, race has nothing to do with how American you are. As long as you uphold the right of the individual and the constitution you are an American.

John Wayne was an American, Geronimo was not.

DT

I thought his comment was relevant and funny as hell. If race has nothing to do with this thread then why is it even mentioned. Race goes hand in hand with culture my friend. At least mostly; you may have a white man that wants to be a true native american or something else of that sort. But of course he is still white. But, yes, to answer your question, they are American if they have been born here or have attained citizenship. But as ThePrince said, race has nothing to do with how American you are. As long as you uphold the right of the individual and the constitution you are an American.

This discussion is not about race; it is about nationality.

If you don't understand that, then you need to re-read the original post. My point is quite clearly stated, and if you actually read the post, I'm baffled that you are still confused. I've also repeatedly said I'm not undermining the status of any American citizen. The point is that this country has developed its own unique culture, and not everyone is a part of it. Sure, when this country was first being formed, it was a melting-pot with no particular identity. But over the years, a specific identity was formed, and that has become the "image" of "American." (Note: Although I say "specific identity", I don't mean one, single type of person that is American. I mean a collection of cultures and identities that you can only find here.)

An analogy: England is essentially as diverse as the US. However, there still is an English identity, and not everyone fits into it, regardless of their citizenship status. A people that are 2nd or 3rd generation immigrants that know nothing but English life? They are English. The 2nd or 3rd generation immigrants that live in ghettos, stay among their own people, and speak their own language? They may be citizens, but it would be difficult to identify them as "English".

---

Splam: If you want to discuss something in this thread, then keep the racist and/or antequated terminology out of your posts.

That said, my point is that black American culture is distinctly American. The bulk of it isn't a part of white middle-class culture, but it certainly is 100% American. This is in contrast to the majority of Mexican-Americans or Chinese/Korean-Americans, who still idenify with those nations and cultures before or in place of America.

That said, my point is that black American culture is distinctly American. The bulk of it isn't a part of white middle-class culture, but it certainly is 100% American. This is in contrast to the majority of Mexican-Americans or Chinese/Korean-Americans, who still idenify with those nations and cultures before or in place of America.

The negro gangsta/thug culture is perhaps American, but it is not part of American Identity. The same way you're stereotyping Mexicans and Chineese, I can say the majority of African-Americans identify with the gansta/thug culture before or in place of America. Thus for the same reasons you rule out any possible Chineese or Mexican president, I can rule out a negro president. Remember I'm trying to argue using your logic here, I don't nececarily agree with it.

Gansta culture => American

Not to even mention Obama, who is on the black side a first generation immigrant.

The negro gangsta/thug culture is perhaps American, but it is not part of American Identity. The same way you're stereotyping Mexicans and Chineese, I can say the majority of African-Americans identify with the gansta/thug culture before or in place of America. Thus for the same reasons you rule out any possible Chineese or Mexican president, I can rule out a negro president. Remember I'm trying to argue using your logic here, I don't nececarily agree with it.

Gansta culture => American

Not to even mention Obama, who is on the black side a first generation immigrant.

Being part of a very specific American culture and being Mexican, are not the same things. Not to mention, it's not as if every black person has to be a part of that predominant black/urban culture.

I'm tired of reading something stupid from you every week. Either you're a persistent troll, or a moron...In either case, you're going to be blocked if you keep it up.

He actually brings up a very good point - for a change.

Who the fuck decided that what blacks practice is "a very specific American culture"... but not what Mexican practice? You did?

Show us some objective criteria, because if you don't, he has just as much a right to say that blacks identify with X before identifying with American culture.

The issue is that the majority of the hispanic population still holds strong ties to their non-American origins. There are exceptions of course, but in general, they identify more with Mexico than this country.

Yeah. Like serving green beer on St. Patty's day.

Fucking spics...

He actually brings up a very good point - for a change.

Who the fuck decided that what blacks practice is "a very specific American culture"... but not what Mexican practice? You did?

Show us some objective criteria, because if you don't, he has just as much a right to say that blacks identify with X before identifying with American culture.

There are some Mexican-American practices that are somewhat unique to America, but that doesn't change the fact that they are often not percieved as being representative of "American".

This thread is about our national identity, and why certain people don't really fit into it. And on that note, I've basically already answered my own question. These various groups aren't percieved as being representative of America mainly because they are too closely tied to their families' original nationalities, and also because they don't really have much of a national voice within the country.

Are such people American? Certainly (in a technical sense, assuming they have citizenship, or assuming they've lived here all their lives). Have they become part of our abstract American "identity"? Generally, no, and it would be the same if I moved to Mexico (Korea, China, etc.), got citizenship, married another American, built a family, hung out with other Americans, and continued to live my life and raise my children as Americans. Would my family and I perhaps have developed specific American-Mexican tendencies and traits? Sure. But that wouldn't enough to define us as "Mexican", nor would we be accepted as such.

but that doesn't change the fact that they are often not percieved as being representative of "American".


Splam can claim the same... Here, it's pretty easy: "... that doesn't change the fact that blacks are often not perceived as being representative of "American".

Splam can claim the same... Here, it's pretty easy: "... that doesn't change the fact that blacks are often not perceived as being representative of "American".

You're confusing middle-class white America with America's identity. Blacks may not often fit in well with middle-class white culture, but they are undoubtedly percieved as American. The phrase "representative of American" is a bit inappropriate (ie. ambiguous), come to think of it. Middle-class white America does make up the bulk of this country, but it doesn't actually exclusively make up the American identity.

To expand this a bit more, take a look at the Amish. They are white, and although they don't fit in well with any of the country's dominant cultures, they still are viewed as an American group of people. Splam's claim about blacks in false.

No, I'm not confusing anything. The only person confusing anything here is you, confusing your opinions with "facts".

Like I said, until you can provide some objective criteria that determines who/what is representative, Splam's comments are as good as yours.

No, I'm not confusing anything. The only person confusing anything here is you, confusing your opinions with "facts".

Like I said, until you can provide some objective criteria that determines who/what is representative, Splam's comments are as good as yours.

First of all, I should remind you that I said that "representative of a country" was an inappropriate, ambiguous phrase for what I'm actually discussing.

Secondly, this is a subjective, yet common experience of many Americans. National identity is obviously an abstract concept, so demanding any facts beyond a logical argument or experience is absurd. This discussion also is meant primarily for Americans, not people living in Norway or South America (or wherever the hell you're from). An outsider looking in often does not have an accurate picture of a country's culture, and thus likely can't fully participate in such a conversation. You and Splam have demonstrated this very well.

Anyways, if you, as a foreigner, still would like to doubt what Americans generally percieve to be part of the American identity, I'd be happy to show you opinions from more Americans. However, this issue extends to any nation of people, including your own. I didn't write the example of me immigrating to Mexico just for fun. Stop missing the forest just for the sake of arguing.

This is a subjective, yet common experience of many Americans. National identity is obviously an abstract concept, so demanding any facts beyond a logical argument or experience is absurd.

Precisely why Splam's comments are as good as yours! You're the one demanding more from other people, while claiming you've provided more than they have.

I'm not sure where Splam is from but that is unimportant. There is no magical barrier preventing an American from stating what he did and being just as right as you are, which is my point.

You're presenting your opinions as facts. They aren't. Sorry, but you can't claim to want a discussion only to rig the discussion in your favor by immediately labeling anything you say a fact and above anyone else's comments.

Precisely why Splam's comments are as good as yours! You're the one demanding more from other people, while claiming you've provided more than they have.

I'm not sure where Splam is from but that is unimportant. There is no magical barrier preventing an American from stating what he did and being just as right as you are, which is my point.

You're presenting your opinions as facts. They aren't. Sorry, but you can't claim to want a discussion only to rig the discussion in your favor by immediately labeling anything you say a fact and above anyone else's comments.

I clearly explained the difference between Splam's comments and the actual reality of the situation.

Splam's claims that blacks aren't part of American culture is incorrect, as he is equating American culture only to the dominant culture. That's understandable, since he has an outside perspective, but his comments are still incorrect. Unless you'd like to argue that a country's most dominant culture must be that country's identity, then I don't see why you have such a problem with this.

The dominant culture is what a foreigner sees from afar. The actual culture is what citizens live and experience. Call me crazy/a bigot/a moron/etc., but a foreigner's opinion on a nation's identity is essentially irrelevant. But I'm not even hiding behind that, as I gave Splam a nice, objective explanation of why he was incorrect.

Seriously, are you telling me you can't see the difference between black Americans and the immigrant communities that, despite their citizenship, are essentially just living here?

I clearly explained the difference between Splam's comments and the actual reality of the situation.

No, you explained your opinion and how it differs from Splam's, since, again, you're arguing opinion, not facts.

You, subjectively, defined what's part of the "American Identity". He then, subjectively, defined that too. The only difference is how you've both defined it.

Honestly I think your letting your experiences as a black american color your perspective on this.
I think trying to define "American" traits is a recipe for disaster. America is too damn big to claim to have a singular cultural identity. Claiming that there is a singular American culture is usually a sure sign of demagoguery. After all the only reason to declare certain cultural practices as being "American" is to denigrate the cultural practices of other Americans as being unamerican.

No, you explained your opinion and how it differs from Splam's, since, again, you're arguing opinion, not facts.

You, subjectively, defined what's part of the "American Identity". He then, subjectively, defined that too. The only difference is how you've both defined it.

Yes, Americans have opinions of what forms the American identity. That's the heart of this thread. That does not mean there is no objectivity involved in how such opinions are formed (and that's really the focus of the thread: Why do we have our particular identity perceptions). Splam is supporting his opinion with things that are objectively incorrect.

Anyways, since I'm basically just repeating myself and helping you derail my thread, consider yourself temporarily blocked. Having a circular debate about nothing is a waste of time. You can argue as much as you want, but at the end of the day, Americans will still have their own relatively common ideas about who in their country really fits the image of American. (And the same is true for all other nations.) The "subjective definitions" of foreigners simply don't matter much on this issue. But hey, if I make a thread about what the world thinks "American" is, you'll be the first to know.

Honestly I think your letting your experiences as a black american color your perspective on this.
I think trying to define "American" traits is a recipe for disaster. America is too damn big to claim to have a singular cultural identity. Claiming that there is a singular American culture is usually a sure sign of demagoguery. After all the only reason to declare certain cultural practices as being "American" is to denigrate the cultural practices of other Americans as being unamerican.

America is a large, diverse nation. I don't believe I ever claimed that we have one specific cultural identity. When I say "American identity", I mean the collection of subcultures and behaviors that form such an identity. Technically, you COULD define that identity as including everyone in this country (whether they really behave in a particular way or not), but in practice, I've found that most don't actually feel that way.

I think I understand your point about labeling cultural practices as "un-American", though that's not really what I'm talking about.

In fact, my original post pretty much sums up exactly what I'm talking about...assimilation, and the groups of people that generally haven't become part of this country (either due to history and circumstance, or from actively refusing to assimilate). I brought up Mexican and Asian-Americans because they are exactly who I am talking about.

America is a large, diverse nation. I don't believe I ever claimed that we have one specific cultural identity. When I say "American identity", I mean the collection of subcultures and behaviors that form such an identity. Technically, you COULD define that identity as including everyone in this country (whether they really behave in a particular way or not), but in practice, I've found that most don't actually feel that way.

I think I understand your point about labeling cultural practices as "un-American", though that's not really what I'm talking about.

In fact, my original post pretty much sums up exactly what I'm talking about...assimilation, and the groups of people that generally haven't become part of this country (either due to history and circumstance, or from actively refusing to assimilate). I brought up Mexican and Asian-Americans because they are exactly who I am talking about.

So because the majority of Asians and Mexicans don't assimilate into American culture (I can only assume dominant American culture here, not sub-culture), they are not representative of America and thus not even a properly assimilated Asian or Mexican should be president? Sorry to burst your bubble, not only Negroes consider gansta/thug culture to be representative of America. Ask any white/asian/mexican person that and he'll agree with me. So by using your own logic, without contradictions, a black person should neither be president.

And don't try to back into a corner and repeat yourself slightly differently. Grab your balls and admit your logic was faulty to begin with. Its not unmanly to change beliefs/opinions.

So because the majority of Asians and Mexicans don't assimilate into American culture (I can only assume dominant American culture here, not sub-culture), they are not representative of America and thus not even a properly assimilated Asian or Mexican should be president? Sorry to burst your bubble, not only Negroes consider gansta/thug culture to be representative of America. Ask any white/asian/mexican person that and he'll agree with me. So by using your own logic, without contradictions, a black person should neither be president.

And don't try to back into a corner and repeat yourself slightly differently. Grab your balls and admit your logic was faulty to begin with. Its not unmanly to change beliefs/opinions.

You're not getting it, and unfortunately, the more I post, the more likely I am to trip on some of my words. So, I'm referring you back to my original post.

Everything you've written in this thread shows that you clearly didn't understand what you read (ie. I never claimed that Asian or Mexican people "shouldn't be president"). It's your responsibility to read and understand a post before you reply, so do it. Now, if you don't have the reading skills or mental capacity to understand plain English, then maybe you should refrain from posting altogether.

Otherwise, don't bother replying until you know what's going on. I'm not going to be victimized because you don't know how to read.

Bottom-line: I'm talking about one thing, and you're talking about something entirely different. Re-read the original post. Slowly. S-l-o-w-l-y.

EDIT: The funny thing about this is that my original post doesn't even need a defense. It was a commentary on my perceptions of things (a perception that I've found many other Americans share), a call to other Americans on Totse to see if they had the same perceptions, and then a question as to why we have such perceptions. Frankly, as a non-American, there really isn't anything you can add to this discussion. I should have specified that in the first post, but I guess I had faith that non-Americans would limit their participation in a discussion about how Americans percieve things.

The issue is that the majority of the hispanic population still holds strong ties to their non-American origins. There are exceptions of course, but in general, they identify more with Mexico than this country.


that's some pretty bold, and dumb, speculation. Majority of immigrants, maybe, but the " majority" of those born here? Definitely wrong. You're raising a double standard here. There's nothing unamerican about being proud of your ethnic origin. Dont tell me you've never heard something like this from a white person: "uhhh dude im half irish half scottish half german half italian and my grandmas second cousin is cherokee so that makes me part cherokee too!"

Also, you need to clear up your definition of what "identifying with america is". Most blacks are not uncle toms like you. They identify with their "hood" , hate white people, and occupy their time overspending their money on bling and arguing over stupid shit. For every intelligent black person there's probably like 20 niggers. I would know, all it takes is a half hour drive through the slums of DC and the ghetto parts of maryland to see it with my own eyes.


Obama fits my definition of america precisely because he doesn't act like a nigger.

the culture you're idealizing is predominantly occupied by whites, but it's getting less and less racialized year by year. Most black don't fit into it though.

Oh, and hispanic soldiers served unsegregated from whites in world war 2. Maybe past generation hispanics integrated so well that you can barely tell they're there? Remember, this new generation of hispanics in this country is new. there's no indication that they will never assimilate.

Also, we must have different conceptions of what an asian american is. Annandale, VA, close to where I live, has the second largest korean concentration in the country. When they go around campus literally running around and speaking in korean, I consider them part of a different culture. But there are plenty of those that have been here for generations, speak perfect english, and have the same interests as any other "generic" american. Asians built our early railroad systems, asian fought in world war 2, chinese food is distinctly an american thing, and most of our imports are from asia. So I wouldn't jump to saying asians lack assimilation. Sure, less movies have a token asian guy than they do a token black guy, but that's just a media problem. White guilt coupled with black victimocracy together with hollywood would have you believe that there are a lot more blacks in this country than the 13% there really are. They're vastly overrepresented in movies. but hey, you guys are good entertainers.

Yes, That does not mean there is no objectivity involved in how such opinions are formed (and that's really the focus of the thread: Why do we have our particular identity perceptions). Splam is supporting his opinion with things that are objectively incorrect.

No, with things you have deemed "objectively incorrect" but have provided nothing but opinion in order to prove it.

Like he said, one could easily say that Black Americans identify with their "gangster" culture first and before America. What objectively proves that false, that you have provided here? Your claim that it's wrong? :rolleyes:

You have provided no objective criteria here, just opinion. Even you admit, yet apparently don't want to follow the ultimate conclusion of, that we could define "American Identity" however we want. Thus, we could include "Hispanic Americans" and "Asian Americans" in the identity, or exclude African Americans, all we want.

that's some pretty bold, and dumb, speculation. Majority of immigrants, maybe, but the " majority" of those born here? Definitely wrong. You're raising a double standard here. There's nothing unamerican about being proud of your ethnic origin. Dont tell me you've never heard something like this from a white person: "uhhh dude im half irish half scottish half german half italian and my grandmas second cousin is cherokee so that makes me part cherokee too!"

Also, you need to clear up your definition of what "identifying with america is". Most blacks are not uncle toms like you. They identify with their "hood" , hate white people, and occupy their time overspending their money on bling and arguing over stupid shit. For every intelligent black person there's probably like 20 niggers. I would know, all it takes is a half hour drive through the slums of DC and the ghetto parts of maryland to see it with my own eyes.


Obama fits my definition of america precisely because he doesn't act like a nigger.

the culture you're idealizing is predominantly occupied by whites, but it's getting less and less racialized year by year. Most black don't fit into it though.

Oh, and hispanic soldiers served unsegregated from whites in world war 2. Maybe past generation hispanics integrated so well that you can barely tell they're there? Remember, this new generation of hispanics in this country is new. there's no indication that they will never assimilate.

Also, we must have different conceptions of what an asian american is. Annandale, VA, close to where I live, has the second largest korean concentration in the country. When they go around campus literally running around and speaking in korean, I consider them part of a different culture. But there are plenty of those that have been here for generations, speak perfect english, and have the same interests as any other "generic" american. Asians built our early railroad systems, asian fought in world war 2, chinese food is distinctly an american thing, and most of our imports are from asia. So I wouldn't jump to saying asians lack assimilation. Sure, less movies have a token asian guy than they do a token black guy, but that's just a media problem. White guilt coupled with black victimocracy together with hollywood would have you believe that there are a lot more blacks in this country than the 13% there really are. They're vastly overrepresented in movies. but hey, you guys are good entertainers.

I gleaned a few intelligent and valid points in there, but why bog it down with racial slurs, bigotry, and pure idiocy?

This is also quite a bit removed from my original post, in part because I allowed the topic to stray. I'll clarify some things:

My perception is what it is, and you can't debate it. In my experience, it seems that many other Americans agree with me, though obviously I don't speak for everyone. If you think I have a ridiculous perception, then provide YOUR perception. Since you're an American, it adds to the discussion. Could you see an Asian actor, or a Middle Eastern actor, or a hispanic actor casted in I Am Legend? Could you see one of these people as a president of the country? What I raised in my first post was simply that seeing such people in these positions "felt strange", and that some of these groups didn't really seem to be a true part of the country.

But I apologize, because I realize the examples I gave were misleading in regard to my actual point. The examples I gave, being the president or a mainstream leading actor, both require assimilating to the dominant culture. A ghetto black person wouldn't fit into those positions any more than a "Viva Mexico" jerkoff, which is what Rust and Splam probably meant.

However, despite this, my point (ie. my perception) still stands. There are groups that are well-established in this country and are without a doubt identifiable as American. I consider these groups to mainly be blacks (be they ghetto blacks, or educated blacks) and whites. I find that collectively, other groups haven't allowed themselves to form a serious legacy in this country, and because of their strong ties to another nation, it's difficult to describe them as American. A ghetto American black? Undoubtedly American. A random Chicago Mexican-American? It gets tricky; they often seem to be more a part of Mexico than this country. Are there exceptions? Yes, many. I would surely consider you to be American. I'd definitely consider many Asian-Americans I went to high school with to be American. But generally speaking, I find that most people in these groups are still way too detached from this country.

In other words, people like the Koreans at your campus, I can't possibly consider them "American" outside of the legal definition. Unfortunately, those that assimilate and build an identity within this nation seem to be relatively few compared to those that are attached to their original nationality. (Lastly, and perhaps this is the biggest point of contention, my notion of this ratio MAY be incorrect...it's based on experience, and I don't believe I can possibly find hard census data to back it up.)

You have provided no objective criteria here, just opinion. Even you admit, yet apparently don't want to follow the ultimate conclusion of, that we could define "American Identity" however we want. Thus, we could include "Hispanic Americans" and "Asian Americans" in the identity, or exclude African Americans, all we want.

You aren't American, and neither is Splam, therefore there is no "we". Also, aside from the title of this thread (which had to be concise), I don't believe I ever said that Hispanic and Asian Americans were completely excluded from being Americans (part of the "American" identity). In fact, from the beginning I said that I was talking about those Hispanic and Asian-Americans that had no bond with this country aside from residing here.

That got me thinking though. If they had casted an American of hispanic or asian origin, it would have seemed absolutely ridiculous to me. With this election....Obama seems like such a natural American candidate. Again, I imagined if he were asian or hispanic, and it just didn't seem "right" to me.

Now, I gave this some thought, and I think there are either two explanations for why I don't see Asians and Hispanics as being as "American" as a black or white person.

2) In my experience, most hispanics identify with their country of origin (usually Mexico) much more than America. The language barrier and lack of prominent hispanic faces is probably another big factor. With Asians it is often the same case. There are many that have become very well-assimilated, but it seems they have almost no representation in media and politics. We know some Asians in our school or work places, and that's it. Collectively, they're very shy. That's in contrast to Hispanics, who are "loud", yet in such a way that emphasizes their foreign origins.

I'm leaning more toward option 2. Even if I do sort of see America as being "black and white", I think there is an objective difference between how integrated and represented black Americans are, compared to Asian and Hispanic Americans. There's also the fact that black Americans were in America for as long as whites, and have absolutely no other home. (The same would technically hold true for Native Americans, though since most of them were wiped out, they never really had a foothold in the culture that dominated this country.)

Also: For those of you who are against Obama on ethnic grounds, is it because of an actual racist complex, or because you don't feel a black person is representative of an "American"?

Everything you've written in this thread shows that you clearly didn't understand what you read (ie. I never claimed that Asian or Mexican people "shouldn't be president"). It's your responsibility to read and understand a post before you reply, so do it. Now, if you don't have the reading skills or mental capacity to understand plain English, then maybe you should refrain from posting altogether.

By your original post, the majority would understand what you're saying is because most hispanics aren't assimlated into the dominant culture, no hispanic should represent the country. Same would therefor go for blacks. And its very clear that this is what you mean. You're a true rascist mate. You're against hispanics and asians being president, however since you are a negro yourself, you cannot be against them. However, using your own rascist logic negroes should also be excluded. Everytime you've "repeated" yourself, its been sligthly different as to not loose the arguement. In totse's eyes, you've already lost.

i know plenty of asians and mestizos who identify as american well before they identify as chinese, mexican, korean, honduran, colombian, etc. your outlook probably has something to do with you living out east.

as for obama's ethnicity, you would do well to remember he is as much "white" as he is "black." why are you so quick to consider him black? especially considering his black ancestors (kenyan, never enslaved) had nothing in common with the black masses (west african, formerly enslaved) in america?

By your original post, the majority would understand what you're saying is because most hispanics aren't assimlated into the dominant culture, no hispanic should represent the country. .

I never said this. I never said anything about who "should" and "shouldn't" represent the country.

A while ago, when that movie I Am Legend was coming out, I remember reading some of the complaints about the casting of Will Smith. Some just didn't like him as an actor, but others didn't think he would fit because he was black.

I honestly felt that he would be 100% equivalent to any white American casted in the role, and I had no problem with it.

As soon as I read this I knew you were going to go into race, not nationality. I do not think Will Smith was the best choice. He only stared in one survival type movie that wasn't that great anyways.

That got me thinking though. If they had casted an American of hispanic or asian origin, it would have seemed absolutely ridiculous to me. With this election....Obama seems like such a natural American candidate. Again, I imagined if he were asian or hispanic, and it just didn't seem "right" to me.

If we were to take the opposite of this logic someone who has a direct connection to the indian tribe that inhabited where Brooklyn was should have played the role. You hinted at this in the late half of your post. Something to note is that you just defined what is "ridiculous" in terms of race representation which one can infer that that particular race is not a representation of "American"


Now, I gave this some thought, and I think there are either two explanations for why I don't see Asians and Hispanics as being as "American" as a black or white person.

1) I'm black, and as a black American, my experience and upbringing has given me something ofa "black and white" outlook.

Yes you do to some extent. You have skirted questions about personal responsibility regardless of race, created double standards, and have said that examples of success from bad situations is off topic:



Here is something else to consider, who has the responsibility of learning? Changing a test to cater to one particular culture would be biased compared to a test that deals with everything required by oh lets say NCACASI to be taught to everyone. There are laws to keep kids in school regardless of ethnicity. This last point is not meant as racist, but do you see what I am getting at?


Off-topic. I will address this however:

" Changing a test to cater to one particular culture would be biased compared to a test that deals with everything required by oh lets say NCACASI to be taught to everyone."

I agree. The dominant culture in our society is NOT the poor, uneducated, urban one. It's perfectly acceptable to have a standard that is geared toward the majority of the society.


You completely ignored the fact that laws apply to everyone regardless of culture. Everyone has a right to an education, of course don't expect to be spoon fed or given good grades.

2) In my experience, most hispanics identify with their country of origin (usually Mexico) much more than America. The language barrier and lack of prominent hispanic faces is probably another big factor. With Asians it is often the same case. There are many that have become very well-assimilated, but it seems they have almost no representation in media and politics. We know some Asians in our school or work places, and that's it. Collectively, they're very shy. That's in contrast to Hispanics, who are "loud", yet in such a way that emphasizes their foreign origins.

This is true to some extent, but in those two particular races it boils down to inter family relations more than birthplace. How do I know? I'm a quarter Guat. and my dad is a half Guat.. You also make a very broad generalization when you say hispanics.

I'm leaning more toward option 2. Even if I do sort of see America as being "black and white", I think there is an objective difference between how integrated and represented black Americans are, compared to Asian and Hispanic Americans. There's also the fact that black Americans were in America for as long as whites, and have absolutely no other home. (The same would technically hold true for Native Americans, though since most of them were wiped out, they never really had a foothold in the culture that dominated this country.)

Hmmm, Lets define integrated:

http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=american

1. To make into a whole by bringing all parts together

By this logic you could say that illegal imigrants are an integral part of America due to their work in infrastructure. You could also say the Oriental store owners that got looted during the L.A riots for no reason were integrated into the American Economy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_Los_Angeles_riots

The riots, beginning in the evening after the verdict, peaked in intensity over the next two days, but would ultimately continue for several days. Continuous television coverage, especially by helicopter news crews, riveted the country and shocked viewers around the world. People watched as parts of the city went up in flames, stores were openly looted, innocent bystanders were beaten, and rioters shot at police.

To admit (a racial or ethnic group) to equal membership in an institution or society.

By this logic, most likely no. Note how African Americans do not get along with cuban immigrants very well in Forida.

Also: For those of you who are against Obama on ethnic grounds, is it because of an actual racist complex, or because you don't feel a black person is representative of an "American"?

http://www.newsmax.com/kessler/Obama_Church_Racism/2008/01/07/62285.html

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/warner-todd-huston/2008/03/16/contrary-claims-obama-very-close-racist-preacher-wright

That is why I am against Obama. McCain distanced himself from his radical pastor as soon as he started making questionable comments. That was way before he ran for president. You would misconstrue this as being racist.

Look DerDrache, African Americans are responsible for where they are headed. Most that fit the criteria of trash do not understand this. Another fun fact about this thread is that you immediantly tried to attack credibility when someone took the opposite viewpoint. MY best tip for you is to not get involved emotionally in any debate.

Back to "American".

Before you can say whether someone is an American or not, you need to define American:

http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=american

Thats one set right there, find some more and we might be able to talk about what American is, not about race.

You aren't American, and neither is Splam, therefore there is no "we". Also, aside from the title of this thread (which had to be concise), I don't believe I ever said that Hispanic and Asian Americans were completely excluded from being Americans (part of the "American" identity). In fact, from the beginning I said that I was talking about those Hispanic and Asian-Americans that had no bond with this country aside from residing here.

1. Seeing as you so stupidly failed to say non-Americans couldn't respond, there is a "we".

Not to mention that the truth of our points stands regardless of our nationality, and this is something an American could be saying it. If you were concerned with actual truth and not your petty bullshit, you'd be worried about the criticism we're providing instead of desperately trying to disqualify it just because we're not Americans.

2. You said, in your very own OP:

"I don't see Asians and Hispanics as being as "American" as a black or white person."

So, no, you didn't say you were talking about "Hispanic and Asian-Americans that had no bond with this country" from the beginning.

Not to mention that if you had, that's essentially a convinient truism. "Blacks rocks are blacks" is an utterly meaningless statement to make. So is "Hispanic and Asian-Americans that had no bond with this country aren't part of the American Identity" if you define "American identity" as "having a bond with this country".

Again, you're rigging this bullshit discussion at every turn.

2. You said, in your very own OP:

"I don't see Asians and Hispanics as being as "American" as a black or white person."



And I then went on to define exactly who in those groups I was talking about. You took a sentence at face-value, and then ignored everything that followed.

Negro doesn't know when to give up.

And I then went on to define exactly who in those groups I was talking about.

Yes, and that explanation included absolutely no mention of "Hispanics that have no bond with this country aside from residing here". In fact, it included not only you saying that you were speaking about most Hispanics, but sweeping generalizations such as "Collectively, they're [Asian Americans are] very shy. That's in contrast to Hispanics, who are "loud", yet in such a way that emphasizes their foreign origins."

Unless these people you are speaking of magically cease to be Hispanics the moment you make silly comments such as that one, you're just piling on the bullshit right now.

Yes, and that explanation included absolutely no mention of "Hispanics that have no bond with this country aside from residing here". In fact, it included not only you saying that you were speaking about most Hispanics, but sweeping generalizations such as "Collectively, they're [Asian Americans are] very shy. That's in contrast to Hispanics, who are "loud", yet in such a way that emphasizes their foreign origins."

Unless these people you are speaking of magically cease to be Hispanics the moment you make silly comments such as that one, you're just piling on the bullshit right now.

In my experience, most hispanics identify with their country of origin (usually Mexico) much more than America.

You're right, that was quite a sweeping generalization. I find that it's often true in the case of many Mexican-Americans and I clarified that in subsequent posts. Since Mexicans make up the majority of Hispanics in the US, saying "most Hispanics" was merely ambiguous, but not incorrect.

Since Mexicans make up the majority of Hispanics in the US, saying "most Hispanics" was merely ambiguous, but not incorrect.

The majority of the people in American prisions are African therfore they must be more prone to commit crime then other races.

See where I am headed?

Since Mexicans make up the majority of Hispanics in the US, saying "most Hispanics" was merely ambiguous, but not incorrect.

It was more than just ambiguous, it was your opinion.

Not only that, but you missed the point: You initially made absolutely no mention of "Hispanic and Asian-Americans that had no bond with this country", but instead made allegations against most Hispanics, and generalizations that included all of them; so you're quite simply mistaken when you said you had made it clear that you were talking about "Hispanic and Asian-Americans that had no bond with this country" since the beginning.

The majority of the people in American prisions are African therfore they must be more prone to commit crime then other races.

See where I am headed?

Yeah. To the moon, apparently, because that is not an analogy to what I said.

My statement was "In my experience, most hispanics identify with their country of origin (usually Mexico) much more than America."

1) "Hispanics" was a reference to Hispanics living America. That was clear from context.

2) For your analogy, prisons would be the analogous to America. You can't extend a statement about prisons to people outside of prisons, just like I wouldn't extend my statement about Hispanics in America to every Hispanic in the world. "Prisoners" is analogous to my use of "Hispanic Americans". "Black prisoners" is analogous to my use of "Mexicans" (the subgroup of hispanics). What did I say about Hispanic Americans? I said most of them identify with their Mexican nationality, which could be true (though it is an opinion, as Rust explained), since most of them are of Mexican origin. The only accurate analogy you could draw is that "Most prisoners are black."

It was more than just ambiguous, it was your opinion.

Not only that, but you missed the point: You initially made absolutely no mention of "Hispanic and Asian-Americans that had no bond with this country", but instead made allegations against most Hispanics, and generalizations that included all of them; so you're quite simply mistaken when you said you had made it clear that you were talking about "Hispanic and Asian-Americans that had no bond with this country" since the beginning.

Fair enough. I don't have solid evidence that most Mexicans are the "no bond with this country" type, and it was indeed an opinion. An opinion based on experience in the country, but you're 100% correct, an opinion nonetheless.

I said most of them identify with their Mexican nationality, which could be true, since most of them are of Mexican origin. The only accurate analogy you could draw is that "Most prisoners are black."

You also said they were" loud" which is opinion.

I did the same thing you did with the exception I infered that African Americans were more prone to commit crime from facts.

So what is racist, conclusions based upon fact, or a very broad statement based upon opinions.

I found it ironic that you seem to try to fight "oppression" and racism, but the statements in your first post are just as racist as the KKK meeting up with the Black PAnthers.

You also said they were" loud" which is opinion.

I did the same thing you did with the exception I infered that African Americans were more prone to commit crime from facts.

So what is racist, conclusions based upon fact, or a very broad statement based upon opinions.

I found it ironic that you seem to try to fight "oppression" and racism, but the statements in your first post are just as racist as the KKK meeting up with the Black PAnthers.

That's in contrast to Hispanics, who are "loud", yet in such a way that emphasizes their foreign origins.

It's a fact that there are Mexicans who hold onto their foreign nationality. I'm guilty of extending that fact to generalize the majority of the Mexican-American population (and consequently, the majority of the Hispanic population), and I can't objectively show whether that opinion is factual. There's quite a difference between that and your analogy.

A proper analogy to what I said would be: "There are black American criminals. Most black Americans are criminals." (Which may be true; You have the benefit of being able to look at demographics.) Discussions of being "prone to crime" are extending your anaology too far. There's a difference between saying "blacks for more likely to be criminals" and "blacks are more prone to crime."

You should learn to read, you stupid fuck. Race has nothing to do with this topic.

This whole thread is necessarily about race and its relationship to nationality, given that the discussion revolves around "blacks", "whites", "hispanics" and "asians" and has done from the original OP.

What's the big deal about the Fresh Prince being in I Am Legend anyway? Why were people complaining? Excuse my ignorance, por favor.

Are Asians and Hispanics American?

Are you american?

Are any of the "whites" american?

It's a fact that there are Mexicans who hold onto their foreign nationality. I'm guilty of extending that fact to generalize the majority of the Mexican-American population (and consequently, the majority of the Hispanic population), and I can't objectively show whether that opinion is factual. There's quite a difference between that and your analogy.

A proper analogy to what I said would be: "There are black American criminals. Most black Americans are criminals." (Which may be true; You have the benefit of being able to look at demographics.) Discussions of being "prone to crime" are extending your anaology too far. There's a difference between saying "blacks for more likely to be criminals" and "blacks are more prone to crime."

I did the exact same thing you did with the exception that my assumption was based upon fact and prior performances of that particular race as a whole over the years.

I could also pull out welfare stats realtin to population percentage, but that is pointless because to you it would some how be incorrect.

Protip: Don't let emotion get in the way of your debates.

I did the exact same thing you did with the exception that my assumption was based upon fact and prior performances of that particular race as a whole over the years.

I could also pull out welfare stats realtin to population percentage, but that is pointless because to you it would some how be incorrect.

Protip: Don't let emotion get in the way of your debates.

You can have a discussion about blacks being more prone to crime, but that isn't a valid analogy for this topic. If you want to discuss that, then make a new thread.

Discussions of being "prone to crime" are extending your anaology too far. There's a difference between saying "blacks for more likely to be criminals" and "blacks are more prone to crime."

But the real question is - Are {blacks} and {Creoles} {non-Criminals}?

Op your argument is weak without stating aspects and characteristics of this "American Culture" you define. And since you state the dominate culture is the nations "identity", then you are not talking about the American Culture, rather the European American culture. And I also find it somewhat ignorant that you exclude Native Americans for they have suffered just as much if not more then the other two cultures.

Never the less, this is a big country and as much as you seek to prove your point, there is no one dominant american culture. The south, the northwest, and west all have different dominant cultures.


However, signs of assimilation in our culture is excessive drinking and singular familys. Studies have shown that U.S families who identify themselves as apart of the Mexican/Asian American culture tend to buy alcohol on the weekdays as opposed to just the weekend. But families who identify themselves as simply Mexican or Chinese culture only buy alcohol on the weekend. Also one sign of assimilation is keeping with family ties. Most families who identify their culture as American keep in far lass touch with their extended families as opposed to the other.

Although I have to disagree with most of the claims of generalizations you have made in this thread, I can vaguely see your point. I think that the main cause of why so many Asians and Hispanics may have not completely assimilated to American culture is family connections.

You see in other parts of the world, especially in Asian and Hispanic culture, family is an important part of life. They usually have strong connections with their families living in and outside the US. Even if most of their family lives here, there will always be a time where they will speak or meet someone in their family who is not living in America and will not have the same customs and ideas as they do. They may take pride in certain aspects of their country as well as completely disregard ideas that may not fit with the culture the person has grown up in.

The reason blacks and whites may be slightly more "American" in your view is perhaps because most of their living ancestors have also been raised here. They may not have outside influences and ideas like many hispanics and asians do.

I tell you this from experience, I am a Hispanic who was born in Peru but moved here at the age of four. Since then, I have always spoken spanish at home, held traditional hispanic customs, and occasionally visit Peru (actually I'm going there in a week :) ). I am told to not forget where I came from and to respect Peruvian culture, no matter how different it may be.

As time passes by though, I believe much more families will integrate to the "American" way of living. There will probably be a time where you will see Hispanic looking families (dark hair, eyes, skin) who will not speak spanish, or practice any of their country's traditions. I know that when I get older and if I have a family, I will be the most comfortable speaking mostly English and will have an "American" way of thinking. Of course I will tell my children of their heritage and take them to my native land and even practice some cultural traditions but I doubt they will do the same with their children, and as time passes by I'm sure there will eventually be a presidential nomination where race or cultural background won't even by an issue anymore.

Op your argument is weak without stating aspects and characteristics of this "American Culture" you define. And since you state the dominate culture is the nations "identity", then you are not talking about the American Culture, rather the European American culture. And I also find it somewhat ignorant that you exclude Native Americans for they have suffered just as much if not more then the other two cultures.

Never the less, this is a big country and as much as you seek to prove your point, there is no one dominant american culture. The south, the northwest, and west all have different dominant cultures.


However, signs of assimilation in our culture is excessive drinking and singular familys. Studies have shown that U.S families who identify themselves as apart of the Mexican/Asian American culture tend to buy alcohol on the weekdays as opposed to just the weekend. But families who identify themselves as simply Mexican or Chinese culture only buy alcohol on the weekend. Also one sign of assimilation is keeping with family ties. Most families who identify their culture as American keep in far lass touch with their extended families as opposed to the other.

You clearly haven't read anything I've written in this thread.

Why is it that on the rare occasions I pass by this forum, I always see DerDrache getting a new asshole torn for himself?

Why is it that on the rare occasions I pass by this forum, I always see DerDrache getting a new asshole torn for himself?

A semi-asshole. A lot of the replies are idiotic misinterpretations of the original post. I made a large generalization, which I eventually acknowledged, but everything else is A-Okay.

I think the main problem is defining what American culture really is, I mean from abroad we perceive several sub-cultures and lifestyles that are all peculiar to America, although they are very different from each other.

I mean if I think about the States I could get a mental image of some guys wearing orange jackets deer hunting in the middle of the woods, drving a Ford pick up truck and drinking heavily.

At the same time though I could get the image of an artsy white urbanite, sipping french wine at an art gallery in Manhattan, and so on.

I think there are several American cultures, that are all inherently American and are more related to geographical location rather than ethnic background.

I think the main problem is defining what American culture really is, I mean from abroad we perceive several sub-cultures and lifestyles that are all peculiar to America, although they are very different from each other.

I mean if I think about the States I could get a mental image of some guys wearing orange jackets deer hunting in the middle of the woods, drving a Ford pick up truck and drinking heavily.

At the same time though I could get the image of an artsy white urbanite, sipping french wine at an art gallery in Manhattan, and so on.

I think there are several American cultures, that are all inherently American and are more related to geographical location rather than ethnic background.

I've been looking for you, dude. Can you help me recognize the song that's playing in the beginning? http://youtube.com/watch?v=QRAQHWDh8tc

If you don't know the song, what are the lyrics (I can google them).

A while ago, when that movie I Am Legend was coming out, I remember reading some of the complaints about the casting of Will Smith. Some just didn't like him as an actor, but others didn't think he would fit because he was black.

I honestly felt that he would be 100% equivalent to any white American casted in the role, and I had no problem with it.

That got me thinking though. If they had casted an American of hispanic or asian origin, it would have seemed absolutely ridiculous to me. With this election....Obama seems like such a natural American candidate. Again, I imagined if he were asian or hispanic, and it just didn't seem "right" to me.

Now, I gave this some thought, and I think there are either two explanations for why I don't see Asians and Hispanics as being as "American" as a black or white person.

1) I'm black, and as a black American, my experience and upbringing has given me something of a "black and white" outlook.

or

2) In my experience, most hispanics identify with their country of origin (usually Mexico) much more than America. The language barrier and lack of prominent hispanic faces is probably another big factor. With Asians it is often the same case. There are many that have become very well-assimilated, but it seems they have almost no representation in media and politics. We know some Asians in our school or work places, and that's it. Collectively, they're very shy. That's in contrast to Hispanics, who are "loud", yet in such a way that emphasizes their foreign origins.

I'm leaning more toward option 2. Even if I do sort of see America as being "black and white", I think there is an objective difference between how integrated and represented black Americans are, compared to Asian and Hispanic Americans. There's also the fact that black Americans were in America for as long as whites, and have absolutely no other home. (The same would technically hold true for Native Americans, though since most of them were wiped out, they never really had a foothold in the culture that dominated this country.)

Also: For those of you who are against Obama on ethnic grounds, is it because of an actual racist complex, or because you don't feel a black person is representative of an "American"?


umm didnt read the long ass thread but to answer your question. 1. Americans are PEOPLE 2. Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians are NOT PEOPLE 3. Thus, Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians are not Americans

umm didnt read the long ass thread but to answer your question. 1. Americans are PEOPLE 2. Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians are NOT PEOPLE 3. Thus, Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians are not Americans

Why would you even bother posting here?

Why would you even bother posting here?

You've got to admit, you can't fault his reasoning. :D

Thanks, OP, for a very thought-provoking topic. IMHO, the answer to your question depends on how you define American. By law, anyone who was born here can claim American citizenship (or is born of American parents) or who has been naturalized.

How one identifies oneself is more petinent. I was born here, but I belong to the Muscogee Nation, and pay tribal taxes--I do not really consider myself American, especaiily since many of my values are so far from what would seem to be the mainstream values of greed, fear, ignorance, homophobia, racism and Christianity.

Think about this, YOUR not american. Most "Americans" roots are back in other countries.

DerDache. You're my new favorite poster.

I'd be curious to get an opinion from an Asian person.

The reason why we aren't considered as being as American is because our heritage and the history of our countries of origin are just too rich to be overshadowed by America's young heritage and culture. People actually find Asia's history and cultures interesting. Where as people in American could give a shit about Africa. They'll identify blacks in America as former slaves rather than once free Africans. They think about America's past more than they think about Africa's past.

When people see Asians, they think about Asia before they think about where that Asian was actually born. Once Americans start losing interests in whats going on in Asia and Asia's history, they'll begin to start accepting Asians like they do with white folks and black folks.

To go even deeper, why aren't Indians considered Asian? When you think of Asian, you think of Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese... basically any land that has a population predominantly with the trait of chinky eyes. India is in Asia, but people think of Indians as Indians. Indonesians as Indonesians. Filipino's would first be mistakenly called Mexicans rather than Asians.

Oh, one more thing, the accent. Anyone carrying an accent other than American English is automatically assumed to not be American. This doesn't just apply to Asians and Mexicans. If you saw a white guy who just spoke with a British accent and was born here, you automatically assume the dude is British. Likewise for Australian accents or black folks speaking with a Jamaican accent.

To go even deeper, why aren't Indians considered Asian? When you think of Asian, you think of Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese... basically any land that has a population predominantly with the trait of chinky eyes. India is in Asia, but people think of Indians as Indians. Indonesians as Indonesians. Filipino's would first be mistakenly called Mexicans rather than Asians.

I used to wonder this, I then decided that the Indian subcontinent is just another victim of the American sense of global geography.

To go even deeper, why aren't Indians considered Asian? When you think of Asian, you think of Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese... basically any land that has a population predominantly with the trait of chinky eyes. India is in Asia, but people think of Indians as Indians. Indonesians as Indonesians. Filipino's would first be mistakenly called Mexicans rather than Asians.


I don't know anyone who thinks of Filipinos as anything but Asian.

And I would say that most people go off of appearance than actual geography. India is technically part of Asia, but the bulk of the cultures in Asia have a very different look. I don't know Indian anthropology, but I would guess they probably have more in common with some other group, rather than with their "chinky eyes" neighbors.

I used to wonder this, I then decided that the Indian subcontinent is just another victim of the American sense of global geography.

Yeah, because it wasn't the UK that tyrannized them for decades and applied the labels they have now.

Yeah, because it wasn't the UK that tyrannized them for decades and applied the labels they have now.

Utterly irrelevant.

The reason why we aren't considered as being as American is because our heritage and the history of our countries of origin are just too rich to be overshadowed by America's young heritage and culture. People actually find Asia's history and cultures interesting. Where as people in American could give a shit about Africa. They'll identify blacks in America as former slaves rather than once free Africans. They think about America's past more than they think about Africa's past.

When people see Asians, they think about Asia before they think about where that Asian was actually born. Once Americans start losing interests in whats going on in Asia and Asia's history, they'll begin to start accepting Asians like they do with white folks and black folks.

To go even deeper, why aren't Indians considered Asian? When you think of Asian, you think of Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese... basically any land that has a population predominantly with the trait of chinky eyes. India is in Asia, but people think of Indians as Indians. Indonesians as Indonesians. Filipino's would first be mistakenly called Mexicans rather than Asians.

Oh, one more thing, the accent. Anyone carrying an accent other than American English is automatically assumed to not be American. This doesn't just apply to Asians and Mexicans. If you saw a white guy who just spoke with a British accent and was born here, you automatically assume the dude is British. Likewise for Australian accents or black folks speaking with a Jamaican accent.

nice point. I actually do think of asians as being from here alot though, like think of all the chinese who were the slaves of the north... subjegated to economic shackles rather than iron shackles. (Chinese and Irish were very hated back in the early days of america...) they were viewed as having taken away many jobs from others and would work for much less money and worse conditions. Its not that they really did anythign wrong, they were justed fucked over as a group and worked hard so consequently other populations which were more organized and held more political clout began to miss out on some labor opportunities because they were unwilling (as a group, individuals were certainly willing) to work for the substandard wages and in the conditions the Irish and Chinese worked in.

"Black People" are becoming much whiter. If the role had been played by someone born in Africa, with 100% black ancestors then it would have seemed strange. The thing is black people have been around for so long that a lot of people are just becoming a darkish tan. I have only known one "true" african american, (OMG she was actually born in africa, not the U.S.) But there are lots of Asians and Mexicans that were born in their home country. Which is why they have much stronger ties than todays coloreds.

"Black People" are becoming much whiter.

They are starting to behave more like white Americans, who tend to be well-educated and career-oriented.*

Phrases like "becoming [racial category]" are painfully idiotic.

They are starting to behave more like white Americans, who tend to be well-educated and career-oriented.*

Phrases like "becoming [racial category]" are painfully idiotic.

I believe he was referring to genetics and race mixing. The African-American the media speaks of is more likely then not to have a good percentage of white genetics in them. At average, 17%. I can easily see if a person is African-American or just pure African, having lived both in America and Europe (where most blacks are actually 100% pure 1st generation refugee).

Yeah I think your second point is the case. Hispanics and Asians in general are too attached to their place of origin. Their language, culture, etc. is what is preventing them from assimilating. In the next generation I think you'll be seeing alot more of those types of people in high positions.

Why the fuck we would want that?

Our policy for non-whites should be "off the land or under the land"!

Der Drache is right. Black culture is a huge part of American culture. Blacks were taken to this country in chains and stripped of their identity. Black Americans have developed a culture far isolated from their African roots. This has been an enormous influence on America. Blacks from slavery have been here for hundreds of years, longer than whites who came in the great waves of immigrants in the 19th Century.

Asians and Hispanics on the other hand are often less recent immigrants. Hispanics have had a big influence on the South West and Texas as can be seen in the cowboy culture. Often, I think Asians especially from what I've seen, assimilate into the American norm or at the least, Asian immigrants tend to have higher incomes. Still, I think if you look deep down into whatever racism you have, no matter how small, you will find that blacks and black culture just seem more American than Asians or Hispanics.

To go back to the original example, think about movies. How many movies can you think of with Asians in the lead role? How many of those movies aren't martial arts movies? There is plenty of racism in Hollywood. There's an extreme lack of Asian superstars.

This thread is full of stereotypes , the correct term would be Latino , there are a lot more Spanish speaking Latino races then Mexican , most being first generation born. So the argument that Latino's familiarize more to their country of origin would be like me saying you familiarize with Africa because you are black.

This thread is full of stereotypes , the correct term would be Latino , there are a lot more Spanish speaking Latino races then Mexican , most being first generation born. So the argument that Latino's familiarize more to their country of origin would be like me saying you familiarize with Africa because you are black.

That's actually not the same thing at all.

That's actually not the same thing at all.

How so ?

I am hispanic, but I view myself as American. But, then again, I also view myself as Nicaraguan, my parents' place of origin. I don't feel or sense a barrier between me and anyone else here in this country, but thats probably because I was born and raised here, in America.