From the Wall Street Journal:
South Americans, including Argentines and Venezuelans, have the highest levels of education and are the least segregated from other ethnic groups in the U.S., even if they are more recent arrivals, according to the study.
Every group except Mexicans has experienced a substantial decline in residential segregation from whites since 1990, according to the most common measure of segregation, the "dissimilarity index," which measures the distribution of two groups in a neighborhood and how much one group is over- or under-represented in relation to the other.
"One would have thought that the newer groups, which are faster-growing, would be the ones maintaining boundaries and that Mexicans, with so many second and later generations, would be dispersing," said John Logan, co-author of the report, "Hispanics in the United States: Not Only Mexicans."
Posts
48 comments:
Without reading the WSJ article, I am going to assume they do not account for the fact that Argentines are racially similar to other whites. Given the MSM's treatment of our first Latino Pope, I doubt this occurs to them.
As we learned from the recent papal election, Argentinians are mostly European, so is it really that surprising that European-Argentinians assimilate well with European-Americans? Except for the language barrier, which can be overcome in a couple months by anyone of average intelligence who wants to do so, it probably doesn't seem that different.
Has anyone bothered to notice that Argentinians are (ahem) white? True, they may be Italians and Spaniards but these are ethnic groups that assimilate to the middle rather than the bottom.
Well, duh. Given that there are many more Mexicans than other Hispanics, it's not surprising in the least that they're less integrated.
Peter
I live in a majority Argentine area of Miami Beach. At night the streets are full with young families (even ones with kids!) out for a bit of wine, or maybe empanadas at Manolos.
Thing is, the Argentines are not assimilating. They're functional. They wake up, go to work, tend to their family and don't cause problems. This behavior is seen as assimilating. That's the metric.
They're fine people. In Miami we say that the Argentines keep us honest, because they're so well dressed, good looking and thin. They are not becoming Americans. They're the Argentine (wishing Italian) diaspora.
Argentina is an all European-white country, it has a negligible population. One would expect them to have no more trouble integrating than Western European immigrants.
Venezuela immigrants are almost all the educated and elite fleeing Chavez. Not unlike the Cuban exodus of 1960. The white South American class they represent view themselves as entirely apart from the indigenous and mestizo classes.
White South Americans are among the most racist, elitist, segregationist people I have ever met. They have far more cultural affinity to American than they do to their own indigenous people that make up the bulk of their countries. Many, especially the younger generation, went to American schools, speak perfect English, work for American multinationals and consume American media.
I can tell you what their opinion of the mostly mestizo Mexican population is in the US, and it's certainly not one of camaraderie.
"One would have thought..."
Yeah, that's why one should look at the data before theorising. However, props to him for at least seeing what the data is, rather than refusing to look or refusing to understand.
Can't say I've ever met an Hispanic Argentine (ie. non-white). I've met Argentines who are Spanish, English, German, and Irish but I can't recall meeting one who has the Mestizo look
Argentina is an all European-white country, it has a negligible population. One would expect them to have no more trouble integrating than Western European immigrants.
Ok, so why is Argentina itself such a mess? It's been like a banana republic for decades. It's been more like its Latin American neighbors than any Anglo societies.
If anything, people like Argentines are "assimilating" to contemporary America because America is becoming more like Latin America.
Has anyone done a study of how white Mexicans, mestizo Mexicans, and Indian Mexicans assimilate in the US?
Another question worth asking. Is Mexico itself well assimilated between those at bottom--mostly Indian--and those at top--mostly white or light-skinned?
If darker lower-class Mexicans cannot assimilate with lighter-skinned upper Mexicans over 100s of yrs, why would they assimilate easily into white America?
"If anything, people like Argentines are "assimilating" to contemporary America because America is becoming more like Latin America."
Many Args are of Italian origin, so for them, it's a case of double-assimilation. As Italians, they assimilated--or even took over--the Spanish order in Argentina. And some now come here and assimilate into North America.
So, the dynamic is somewhat different.
Italians assimilating into Hispanic and then into Anglo order.
Commentator Peter, I am reporting you for the following microagression:
> Well, duh. Given that there are many more Mexicans
> than other Hispanics, it's not surprising in the least
> that they're less integrated.
It hurts my feelings that you would say something so foolish. The Italian immigrants and Irish immigrants of the last 80 years are a counterexample to your "well, duh" theory about large groups having trouble assaulting. Italians and Irish, who came in quite large numbers, assimilated in a generation.
Here on the East Coast we have many white Hispanic immigrants from places like Costa Rica, Cuba, Argentina and Columbia. They assimilate quickly and usually marry non-Hispanic whites. Most already speak English when they arrive. Many take great pains to explain that they are white and not like typical Hispanic immigrants.
I had construction job with a white Costa Rican boss who would only hire white workers and said so. Another white Brazilian boss(most Brazilian immigrants are white or close)railed endlessly against Mexicans and how they ruin everything(another group of workers on the site were Mexican and did typically piss poor quality work.
Closer analysis of the Hispanic vote would show that the GOP is likely to get even less of the illegal alien vote than they think. The Hispanics who do vote GOP are assimilated, third and fourth generation Mexican, Cuban and Puerto Rican Americans who speak English at home, are mostly lighter skinned and European looking and who are often married to non-Hispanic whites.
They are not like most illegals in any way.
I have a great idea. I think this will be worth it in the long run.
US keeps the illegals from Mexico and gives them amnesty. But it would be wrong for US to gain such wonderful diversity without giving something back in return. So, if we take in 20 million Mexers, Mexico takes 20 million of our blacks. It will be our gift to them. And since blacks are so sick of white 'racism', they should finally enjoy the blessings of brown generosity.
Everyone wins.
And since Jews seem so bitchy about living in white majority America, they can all pack up and relocate to Mexico too.
And some now come here and assimilate into North America.
So, the dynamic is somewhat different.
Italians assimilating into Hispanic and then into Anglo order.
They're assimilating into contemporary America, which is a different animal from WASP dominated Anglo-America.
gee, it's almost as if the higher the IQ, the better the assimilation :) of course it's obvious, so therefore it's unmentionable in reality.
Argentines are not similar to Western Europeans. I have a ton that I'm linked up to on facebook and to call them 'white' is laughable. To call them Italian is laughable.
But they are undeniably more white/European than Mexicans so that explains why they aren't creating a totally different society.
The only men I've known who call Argentines whites are men who like the hispanic type women, but don't want to marry a 'hispanic' so they go for the 'Argentines are Europeans' excuse.
JG:
What's assimilating and a normal american? As De Niro's character asks in Heat: "What the fuck is that? Barbeques and ballgames?"
Perhaps the elite argie lifestyle is better?
That said, what type of argies are in US?
Messi, Higuain, Zanetti types or Tevez, Aguero, Di Maria type?
sounds like racist mexicans are the new KKK!
http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2013/03/20/men-in-decline-means-more-single-moms/
The thing is I know a huge family that immigrated to Argentina.
German. Half the family left Argentina during that big financial collapse....that side of the family has remained pure white...blue eyes blonde etc.
The other half of the family, though nice people, have been 'Argentine-washed' by marrying other Argentinians.
The children are white-ish...but no longer white. And the difference is noticeable, astonishing, and frankly disturbing as to how fragile genetics truly are.
The daughter who was white-ish (half Argentine, half-German) just had a child...and that child looks like your classic Latin American dark skinned Mexican. To say the child is anything related to the other half of the family is simply not valid.
Ok, so why is Argentina itself such a mess? It's been like a banana republic for decades. It's been more like its Latin American neighbors than any Anglo societies.
From my queries over the years to my friends in the Latin American diaspora in both Washington and Miami (read: legal immigrants or temporary expatriates from the upper classes of everywhere from Venezuela to Peru to the DR to Paraguay), Argentines have a universal reputation among other LatAms as being a nation of flashy get-rich-quick scam artists of no particular work ethic. For other Latinos to think says a lot about Argentines, but within that universe there are nationalities that have inter-Latin reputations for a strong work ethic (Chileans) or for honesty (Uruguayans) or for modesty (Costa Riquenos), so there are distinctions to be made.
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2013/03/20/Netanyahu-Says-Obama-Seems-To-Have-Incestuous-Relationship-With-American-Media
American politics is like sports where the referee is crooked and favors one side.
Ernesto Sabato's THE TUNNEL and ON HEROES AND TOMBS are must reads.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Heroes_and_Tombs
interesting that John Malkovich has the film rights on HEROES.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zGp-XNMI4U
globe trekker argentina. they love meat.
Anonymous:"It hurts my feelings that you would say something so foolish. The Italian immigrants and Irish immigrants of the last 80 years are a counterexample to your "well, duh" theory about large groups having trouble assaulting. Italians and Irish, who came in quite large numbers, assimilated in a generation."
The Catholic Irish did not "assimilate in a generation." The process took many generations and required a veritable kulturkampf on the part of the Anglo Establishment.
syon
Anonymous:"The thing is I know a huge family that immigrated to Argentina.
German. Half the family left Argentina during that big financial collapse....that side of the family has remained pure white...blue eyes blonde etc."
Blue eyes and blonde hair are not indicators of being "pure white."
syon
I once heard a Mexican tell a joke about Argenitians:
Q: why do they drill holes in Argentinian coffins?
A: so when they are burried, the worms can crawl out and puke.
Ok, so why is Argentina itself such a mess? It's been like a banana republic for decades. It's been more like its Latin American neighbors than any Anglo societies.
You can thank the British for that. All New World British startups, Canada, USA, Australia and New Zealand are prosperous and politically functional because of their great fortune in being founded by the British.
Remember 2 centuries ago the English were on the forefront of political thought. They also pioneered the industrial revolution. Obviously not everything is included in this small post. But suffice it to say that Spain and Portugal did not bequeath to their colonies what the British did to theirs.
You could also add the matter of demographics. The British colonies tended to be overwhelmingly British and Northern European while the Spanish and Portuguese miscegenated with the slaves and natives.
For those interested in this topic, Adam Smith includes a lengthy discussion of this in his book Wealth of Nations. Yes, even back in 1776, guys like Smith were asking questions about why the British New World colonies were outperforming their Spanish/Portuguese counterparts. Apparently this is nothing new. It has been evident for over 200 years that Latin America is pretty much a failure.
The sad thing is the new elites who are in such a hurry to overthrow the WASP order probably don't realize what they are throwing out. Personally, my dad came here from Europe after WW2 and told me he specifically choose the USA because he knew it was an English offspring with English rule of law. Despite not being able to speak English, he knew the English ran the best societies and thus, he never gave a second thought to immigrating to Argentina or other Latin American destinations which he knew would be dysfunctional despite being untouched by the war.
"Ok, so why is Argentina itself such a mess? It's been like a banana republic for decades."
About a decade or more ago I read through a couple hundred page economic tome from some source like the UN or a PhD dissertation (maybe both) on exactly this topic.
The basic answer as I recall it was that everyone in Argentina, including the government and voters, has assumed Argentina was a wealthy place with plenty of natural resources and a world-competitive economic performance. This assumption is almost solely due to the performance of the Argentine economy during the US Civil War.
While the US was at war Argentina did really well and got rich stepping into the gap and selling to the Europeans (beef, other ag products). Many immigrants arrived in Argentina during this boom time. The culture came to somehow assume this was "the new normal" and budgeted (spent) accordingly.
If California never returns to it's post-WWII state, it may be another example of people's expectations staying a good bit higher than what reality can provide. Once expectations get set, it's painfully hard to down-size them...
We have a distinction between legal and illegal immigration (Yes both are too high). There also needs to be a distinction between immigration and MASS immigration.
Argentines are assimilating for a number of reasons, one of which is that their immigration pattern is not mass immigration.
Mexicans are not assimilating for a number of reasons, one of which is that their immigration pattern is MASS immigration. Remember more Mexicans have come in the past 40 years than all the Germans Italians, Greeks, Poles, Swedes, Finns, Norwegians, and French COMBINED in 400 years.
As I wrote earlier, my dad came over from Europe after WW2. He was the only guy from his country in our town. Thus, my siblings and myself were surrounded by Germans, English, Irish and other traditional Americans who had been in this nation for a hundred years. I never learned one word of my dad's native language and never thought of myself as any different from those others.
I sometimes wonder how I would have grown up if I were in a town with thousands of people from my dad's native land and my school was 30 percent or more ethnic along my lines. I doubt my view of America would be the same.
How can you post on this topic without a reference to the UCLA study????
Argentina is an all European-white country,
Lol.
You have no idea just how non-white huge chunks of Argentina are, and I'm not just talking about recent Bolivian and Paraguayan immigrants. (Anti-white, too, if I were to judge from some conversations I've had with argies.)
Ok, so why is Argentina itself such a mess? It's been like a banana republic for decades. It's been more like its Latin American neighbors than any Anglo societies.
It hasn't been "like a banana republic" and the country is far from a "mess." So it hasn't reached western european levels of prosperity. Okay. Neither has the rest of the world (besides a few asians). It doesn't mean that things haven't been improving over time. They unquestionably have. T The last decade (since the financial debacle around 2001-02) has perhaps been the best in the country's history. Things are on the up and up, not stagnating.
From my queries over the years to my friends in the Latin American diaspora in both Washington and Miami (read: legal immigrants or temporary expatriates from the upper classes of everywhere from Venezuela to Peru to the DR to Paraguay), Argentines have a universal reputation among other LatAms as being a nation of flashy get-rich-quick scam artists of no particular work ethic.
Lol, lemme guess, you form an opinion about Croatians based on what Serbians think of them, right?
Much simpler (and more accurate) to conclude Argentines are resented because they're whiter and richer.
Unlike Mexicans, who simply walk across topography contiguous with the United States, Argentines and Venezuelans leave behind at considerable distance their native lands, which may give them a greater incentive to assimilate.
That said, I tend to agree with an earlier commenter's point that today's immigrants are assimilating into contemporary American multi-culti-diverso-stratified Back To Blood culture instead of into the earlier, far more unified (and healthier and wiser, by dint of having encouraged assimilation and discouraged alien mores and customs) anglo-WASP culture.
@silver - "You have no idea just how non-white huge chunks of Argentina are, and I'm not just talking about recent Bolivian and Paraguayan immigrants."
according to wikipedia, that font of all knowledge, 86.4% of the argentinian population is of white european ancestry. another 6.5% is mestizo (so part white). the rest (7.1%) are native (south) americans, arabs, and "other." iow, it's a pretty white country.
according to wikipedia, that font of all knowledge, 86.4% of the argentinian population is of white european ancestry. another 6.5% is mestizo (so part white). the rest (7.1%) are native (south) americans, arabs, and "other." iow, it's a pretty white country.
The population of Argentina is the result of the intermixing between several groups, including Indigenous American, European and African populations. Despite the commonly held idea that the population of Argentina is of mostly European origin, multiple studies have shown that this process of admixture had an impact in the entire Argentine population. In the present study we characterized the distribution of Indigenous American, European and African ancestry among individuals from different regions of Argentina and evaluated the level of discrepancy between self-reported grandparental origin and genetic ancestry estimates. A set of 99 autosomal ancestry informative markers (AIMs) was genotyped in a sample of 441 Argentine individuals to estimate genetic ancestry. We used non-parametric tests to evaluate statistical significance. The average ancestry for the Argentine sample overall was 65% European (95%CI: 63-68%), 31% Indigenous American (28-33%) and 4% African (3-4%).
As someone who was actually born in Argentina (and is 95% European, at least according to 23andme), although haven't been living there for years, I have to say that most Argentinians, specially in Buenos Aires, are in appearance pretty similar to Southern Europeans (Italian and Spanish). Which is not surprising, since at one point about half of Buenos Aires consisted of people born in Italy, such was the scale of the immigration. But, in other regions, if you go north or south, they are much more indigenous or "mestizos". And in the last decades, illegal immigrants (!!?) from Bolivia and Peru changed that even more.
The immigrants who go to the US are the white type. There are quite a few Argentinian jews abroad, too.
As for why the country is such a mess in politics and economy when it had so many things going for it, well. V.S. Naipaul wondered the same thing too (he wrote a book about it, not that good, but interesting).
I suppose it's partly the blame of Peronismo and its curse, and perhaps partly the blame of the Italian heritage (Italy has a lot of corruption and bureaucracy too).
It's a strange country, in many ways it has been surpassed by Brazil, but in a few aspects remains a more livable place, with less shocking contrasts. I suppose it's because in Brazil there is much more social/racial disparity. But Brazilian politicians and businessmen tend to be smarter.
Paul Theroux argued that Naipaul's anti-Argentine book was biased by the Hindu vegetarian's aversion to the most meat-loving country on earth.
The basic answer as I recall it was that everyone in Argentina, including the government and voters, has assumed Argentina was a wealthy place with plenty of natural resources and a world-competitive economic performance. This assumption is almost solely due to the performance of the Argentine economy during the US Civil War.
The Argentine economy didn't really hit
its stride until after 1900. In the thirty years to 1930 Argentina grew substantially wealthier than Spain and Italy (per capita, about 40-50% wealthier).
While the US was at war Argentina did really well and got rich stepping into the gap and selling to the Europeans (beef, other ag products). Many immigrants arrived in Argentina during this boom time. The culture came to somehow assume this was "the new normal" and budgeted (spent) accordingly.
The implication here seems to be that those assumptions were incorrect and that somehow "budgeting" according to those assumptions heralded the downfall of Argentina's economy. At least that's they way the story is popularly told: Argentina was once among the richest countries in the world, but the Argies mucked things up, their economy took a tumble, and now they're poor.
Well, the fact is Argentina even during the 'lost decade' of the 1980s was far wealthier than during the boom times of the 1920s. Argentina's economy never stopped growing. It simply grew at a slower rate than Europe or America, and endured lengthier periods of stagnation.
At least it might possibly stop the incessant and annoying bragging by subcons about their 'academic superiority.'
Dems like to portray themselves as the party of equality and the GOP as the party of inequality.
But there seems to be more social and economic inequality among dem groups, especially between rich Jews/gays and poor blacks/browns. Look at NY and Cal. It's no wonder social liberalism is used to mask the reality of economic inequality. By making all dems--rich and poor--champion 'equality' for gays, an aura of love of equality is created among libs. It hides the fact that the dems are made of the master class, servant class, and the dependent class.
Don't Cry for Me Mexifornia
Nick Brady (is alleged to have) said "Argentina never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity"
The only men I've known who call Argentines whites ...
Well, the only Argentine I've ever met has an Italian last name, a biochemistry PhD from Turin, has Al Pacino's coloring, and speaks better English. Works for a company called Bio-Rad. Nice guy, but a Laker fan.
Living in a small town in the middle of the USA and not near a slaughterhouse, I don't know any Mexican immigrants, legal or otherwise. Not a single one. The few that we have here run the Mexican restaurants, or work on the bigger livestock farms where they're invisible.
So when I think of Mexicans, it would be easy to think of Cesar Millan, a hard-working, entrepreneurial guy who's in great shape and could teach average Americans about many more things than how to handle their dogs. He seems like a great guy, and a real asset to the country.
But because I read and use my brain, I realize that Cesar isn't the typical Mexican immigrant, so I wouldn't make policy based on him. But I don't think most people think it through that far; they just see someone like him or other positive examples in the media, and think it'd be great to have more of them here. The same way that US elites go hang out with elites in Mexico and think they'd make great citizens.
One thing to remember. Mexicans move into an area of the USA that is geographically contiguous with their own country. Argentinians arrive from a whole continent away.
It's whiter than the United States, that's for sure.
The whites in the United States are "whiter", that is they generally have no non-white admixture, even despite family legends about Indian ancestors and the like.
Whereas there tends to be more non-trivial non-white admixture among whites in Argentina, even though there may be more people in Argentina that identify as white.
Post a Comment