173 thoughts on “What are race relations like among Puerto Ricans on the island and in the U.S.?”
We are diverse and I like that
Puerto Ricans are pretty diverse within their families–even within their immediate families. I know within my own family we have whites, obvious mixtures with Africans, not so obvious mixtures with Tainos and combinations of all three. In addition, we also have combinations with Asians, African- and white Americans, and other Latinos that reflect our more recent historical/social reality. Within our family, we all seem to get along. I mean as much as families in general do–probably better, I like to think. Disagreements have nothing to do with race. There is however an awareness that some of us are ‘achinao’ or ‘trigueño’ or ‘rubia’. I personally like the fact that my family is so racially varied.
We came to the States before I was born and so I can’t really comment on race relations on the island except as it was carried over by our first generation to arrive in New York. There were definite attitudes, I believe, that suggested white was better, yet, at the same time there was an openess or receptivity towards other groups. For example, I always thought it was interesting that some of my aunts married Filipinos here in New York and that others came with their Puerto Rican husbands who were white like themselves. My uncles however all married darker Puerto Rican women or ‘trigueñas’ on the island. In my immediate family, my mother who is the blood sister to my aunts and uncles, is darker than them because her father was different, my grandfather who I never met and whose picture I have never seen must have been mixed with Taino and African blood. My father was a white Puerto Rican. I myself look white. My closest cousins, however, are Filipino and Puerto Rican. And my favorite uncle, who died a few years ago, was Filipino.
Racismo en Puerto Rico
Diaz Blanco already said that, “Puerto Rico es la mas blanca de las Antillas”. Not anything to be proud of but a process of racial genocide that most of us try to hide. My bisabuelo, Antonio Rosario, son of slaves born in 1887 in the Island of Vieques, married a mestiza “pa mejorar la raza”. Mi abuelo, did the same thing, and so did my father. The result, a light skin Puerto Rican, me. Although it is not my intent, I might even be accusing my ancestors of partaking in this cultural genocide that lives undisturbed in Puerto Rico. Racism is a plague deep-rooted in our history. Once we accept that, we might be able to do something about it.
P.D. Did you know that about three years ago in Halloween the students of the UPR Law School painted themselves brown and their lips white, imitating that great bigot of ours, Diplo? Interesting, no?
RE: We are diverse and I like that
The word “trigue~na” tacitly implies racism. It could loosely be translated, based on its etimological root, trigo, “like wheat”. The resemblance of wheat and Black people escapes me. It is a word that is used as a euphemism when referring to people of marked African decent. To try to sound apologetic only proves my previous claim in another message that racism in Puerto Rico is, to quote Bruce Lee, ‘alive and kicking.”
RE: We are diverse and I like that
That’s funny, but I’m trigueña and have always felt that the word had a positive connotation–almost suggesting a dark beauty. Trigueña means a kind of bronze skin tone that can be either Taino or a mixture of African and Spanish. I never thought of it being exclusively associated with African people, but that it could include indigenous people and Asians as well.
RE: Racismo en Puerto Rico
That is to say, then, that race relations are poor on the island? The fact that of the Great Antilles, Puerto Rico has the largest number of whites is basically descriptive. Although, there is a historical explanation for it that is not completely reducible to genocide. Five or six years ago, the Performing Garage in New York City, a very well established and highly respected experimental theatre, did a production of Arthur Miller’s The Crucible, and also used white actors with painted black faces and painted white lips. It was quite shocking. Then there was the parade of fire fighters who also thought it was funny to impersonate black men somewhere in a New York suburb. How are we to understand these? As isolated incidents of an extreme and offensive nature or as a systemic condition that most members of society accept and participate in?
Why is there so much interracial marriage in Puerto Rico? What is the history of this? Certainly, this practice is not reducible simply to an example of cultural or racial genocide? Although, I could see segregationists arguing as much.
There is racism but I would like to see all the contradiction laid out without accusatory tones–although, if need be, that’s okay. And I would like, through specific examples, to know from others where they have experienced racism from another Puerto Rican and also when they have not. Also, I believe class issues come into play here a great deal. And perhaps, there is an opportunity here to look at how class plays into all of this. Especially, your example of the UPR which is, although a public university, the mainstay of the upper classes of Puerto Rico. The upper classes in all societies are the most conservative and least in touch with social trends that run like a river below them.
RE: RE: Racismo en Puerto Rico
I remember one time saying at a friend’s house that I wanted to visit the Congo. His automatic reply was, “Why go there? Just go to Loiza. They’re all the same.”
I have to say that even Cortijo, one of the main exponents of “negrura” in Puerto Rico, ridiculed his ancestors with “El Negro bembon”. I know of only two Black Puerto Ricans (and this is not an oxymoron) who are actively involved in studying la negrura in Puerto Rico from Marcus Garvey’s perspective. Some people say they are Puerto Rican first and then Black. My friends understand that being Black is a millenary issue, while being Puerto Rican is a historical accident of at most half a millenium.
RE: RE: We are diverse and I like that
Feeling that a word has a positive connotation has little to do with the true meaning of the word.
Besides, have’t you heard people saying in an obvious apologetic manner, “El el trigue~no.” Then when you look at him he’s complexion is one of the darkest there is. Puerto Ricans don’t dare say, “El es negro.” many people think this is even an insult but if they call you “jabao”, or “indio”, or “cano’, everything is fine. (Of course, if they call you “indio” in Mexico it can be seen as an insult. Phrases like, “Ay, no seas tan india” plague Mexican Spanish.
To be Black in Puerto Rico like in the Americas is almost a sin.
telenovelas
Yo aborrezco las telenovelas, pero si las tomamos como elemento que refleja la cultura popular, resulta interesante preguntarse cuantas actrices y actores negros han protagonizado una telenovela en Puerto Rico. No sera porque no resultan esteticamente dignos para los productores?
RE: RE: RE: We are diverse and I like that
Feeling that a word has a positive connotation is indeed part of the meaning of the word. All you have been describing are negative connotations. But the fact is that there was colonialism and that there is the legacy of colonialism and the conditions of history in which we all live. Your comments basically serve as a partial lexicon of racial attitudes that reflect that legacy.
Further, approaches to language usage are useful to a certain extent. The reality is that indigenous and African peoples fared better among the Spanish than they did among the English during the colonial period. But these are very complex issues and there are regional variations that must be identified and accounted for.
My understanding is that trigueño is cafe con leche and that negro is black. And I have heard their usage as basically descriptive. I myself have used these expressions in a neutral way, just as I use blanco or rubio. I have never heard trigueño used euphemistically to mean black. But of course I believe you have and could see how, given the colonial values that are a part of all cultures of the Americas, this would be the case. But I believe again that this is but one dimension or approach to the issue of race relations.
RE: RE: RE: RE: We are diverse and I like that
Yes, Kiwi, you’re right when you imply that the popular connotation of a word is part of its meaning. I admit I didn’t choose my words wisely.
However, words like trigueno as precisely the ones that complicate racial matters even more in Puerto Rico because within their conception there’s a tacit implication to ignore the subject. You have to polarize first to weed out the people who won’t take a stand, then from there might arise hope for a constructive dialogue or a resolution. If Malcolm X would’ve not taken his radical stands on being Black, who knows how much worse Blacks inthis country would be. It you read Malcolm’s last written in Mecca, then you start seeing how a metamorphosis was taking place, without abandoning his firm stand. Unfortunately, he was murdered before he could reformulate his thinking.
Diplo
Hector,
Could you comment about what you said about Diplo, i.e. tha he’s a “bigot”?
I would like to know more about this popular 1950s television character and what you think about him.
Hector Rosario wrote:
P.D. Did you know that about three years
ago in Halloween the students of the UPR
Law School painted themselves brown and
their lips white, imitating that great
bigot of ours, Diplo? Interesting, no?
Racism in New York Puerto Ricans
I have observed from Puerto Ricans in New York that we are Puerto Rican “first” and light or dark skinned “second.” I find from my experiences that racist remarks seem to be more prevalent when Puerto Ricans are referring to moreno-Americanos (whatever that means) as opposed to moreno Puertorriqueno–which is, by the way, a term I, personally, have never heard. My paternal aunt and maternal uncle were very racist against non-spanish-speaking blacks. If they were spanish-speaking dark-skinned people they would never refer to them as negro but rather Cubano, Puertorriqueno, Dominicano, etc. Bye the way this forum is very timely with respect to a play that I am working on putting up soon entitled “Closing Doors”. It deals pricisely with Puerto Ricans and the issues revolving around skin color, “pelo malo” and the anglosizing (sp?) of our people. –Paz!
RE: RE: Racismo en Puerto Rico
If this has already been discussed, then forgive the repetitiveness. However, what of Black Latinos? “Regular” PR’s will make disparaging remarks in Spanish, thinking that the person is black, and therefore doesn’t understand. Or what of PR mothers of aprevious generation discouraging their daughters from marrying a black Latino–it might darken the race. According to Census figures, Latinos will be the largest minority group in a few years. I shudder to think what’ll happen to blacks. Will Latinos see them as allies? As competitors who can be blamed for social conditions? Of course, by playing this stupid game, we engage in the same “divide and conquer” crap that allows the dominant part of society to laigh all the way to the bank!
Historical View of Slavery
I believe it was Mr. Smit who noted that under the Spanish, indigenous and African peoples “fared better” than under the British. This view (common among Latinos, and which serves as an apologetic defense) has got to be challenged, and ultimately rejected as false.
It was under the Spanish (first the Portugese) that the apalling slave trade and native peoples genocide began. It was under the Spanish that Mexico (Aztecs), Incas, etc. died, mostly by “germ warfare”, but also by massive genocidal acts. Let’s not forget it was Columbus’ diary that notes how several Indians were taken by force to help him find gold. Did the natives “fare better” under the British? Look around–I read with sadness the other day how American Indians own about 3% of the US landmass–is this progress? After all, they once owned 100%! In addition, the Spanish did not bother with “improving” slaves’ conditions. Why? Because they saw the black as an animal, and if he died, then one could go out and get another one. Of course, the British just wiped out the Indians in god’s name! Lastly, force and violence are the reason most of Latin America is Christian–sometimes the sword followed the missionaries and sometimes the missionaries followed the sword. Besides, its ridiculous belief system–virgins? talkin’ and walkin’ snakes? man walking on water?–does anyone honestly think that the Tainos woke up one day, and said, “By god, we’ve been wrong all this time! It’s Jesus, who’s the answer!”? No, it was one more way of colonizing people-attack their belief system and you’re halfway there to conquering them completely!
Indians and blacks faring better under the Spanish? Not so.
RE: Racism in New York Puerto Ricans
Your aunt and uncle call them Cubano, or Boricua because they ARE Cubano or Boricua, not like the Moreno Americanos who are not hispanic. We both have the African blood but raised different and we have the other cultural combos in us(taino, Spain) like that. Moreno Americanos are raised like Americans. They are very different from us based on upbringing and the bloodline.
Race relations among Puerto Ricans
I have been reading the messages regarding this subject. I agree with many of the views. Growing up in Jersey City, NJ, it was understood a girl married a lighter skinned Puerto Rican if she was dark skinned to “improve the race”. In fact, that is exactly what I did – although not intentionally. I knew dad would not accept a darker skinned son in law no matter what the race! This was ingrained from infancy. This aside, I remember hearing stories about the superiority of the lighter skinned PR over the darker skinned PR – the darker skinned person doing domestic work to get by (my mom did just that).
Why? I do not understand this. Even anglos ask if there are racial and class differences among the different skin tones in the island. Although I was raised here and do not know what life is like on the island, based on statements from family and friends, I had to say, yes. Why is that? Could it be the work of the Spaniards when they colonized the island? How about Puerto Ricans in the mainland? Are we imitating the white man’s view of dark skin and its worth in society?
Again, I ask, why is that??
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: We are diverse and I like that
Hector, you are taking this racism thing WAY too seriously. Puerto Rico, as you know is comprised of the several colors of skin, and we’re okay with that. so we call some triguenos, or rubias, or even coloraos, sometimes pecoso(a). well, that’s how the puertorrican describes people, and those on the island KNOW that it’s not a negative thing! maybe our previous generations did, but we never use those terms in a negative connotation. the new Puerto Rico is one filled with deep love for the culture, and the youth of Puerto Rico are the ones embracing the old traditions and loving and accepting everything about Puerto Rico. I don’t think that you need to bring malcom x into the picture here, that type of racism does not exist on our island.
RE: RE: RE: Racismo en Puerto Rico
Hector, what is your beef with Puerto Rico and it’s african history? We all love and embrace los negros de la isla. we even honor and recite poetry that describe the negro in puerto rico. ‘Por la encendida calle antillana, rumba-macumba-candonde-bambula, entre dos filas de negras caras, ante ella un congo, bongo y maracas…’ we love it! it’s contributed to who the puertorrican is today! you can see it in our people, you can hear it in our music, you can feel it in our essence. the african negro was, will and always will be part of the puertorrican culture, and we are proud of that! being a negro en puerto rico never has, nor never will be this horrifying racial issue on the island that you’re describing . there will always be people who will be racist among any culture, but puerto rico, as a pueblo embrace the black, taino and spanish cultures that comprise who we are today! viva puerto rico y su diversidad!
RE: Race relations among Puerto Ricans
It’s called internalization–think about it. Those of us who grew up with the “electronic babysitter,” saw (and still see) the assumptions, value system, etc growing up. Think about this fact: even today, whenever there’s a new toy, say a play oven, most of the time they are gender specific: so, using the stove example, chances are you’ll see girls playing with the oven and boys with cars. The implication is that girls cook and boys drive cars. It’s gotten a little better, but the basic assumptions are still there. So, dark-skinned Latinos are drug dealers and cannot speak English very well in the movies we watch, while the lighter ones have good jobs and are fluent. Look at Univision’s or Telemundo’s news programs. How many darker skinned people are there as reporters or analysts? Virtually none. Whenever a minority group tries to emulate the majority group, they internalize the group’s views. See my previous message on how this has played out in terms of religion–is it a coincidence that Latin America is predominately Christian? Would it be different, if say, China had conquered this hemisphere? Yup, most Latinos would probably be Buddhist or Confucian.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: We are diverse and I like that
Well, Miss Rubia, I would certainly agree with that. I think we should worry whether or not we speak the Spanish language correctly if we Mainlanders visit the island. That’s when we might be ridiculed or “looked at in a funny way”. All of the views outlined prove that we must work together as a people – view each other as equals no matter what color – and treat each other with respect, whether we are here or there. Once we get past that, these race/color issues will stop being such a big deal. Can we just get along?
RE: We are diverse and I like that
I am from Miami,FL.. I am Puertrican descent.My family is diverse in color. There are whites,blacks,brown,etc..I learned to appreciate the different colors or shades of skin in our family.This appreciation that I instilled in my upbringing, helped me to understand the ignorance of people. Martin Luther King Jr. said it best,”Don’t judge a person by the color of their skin,but judge him/her by the content of their character.” This quote knocks out all stereotypes.If people would learn and understand this quote from the heart,mind,and soul racism would abolish.
RE: Racism in New York Puerto Ricans
Gloria:
I was born and raised here in the United States. I have never lived in Puerto Rico; my time there has been lmited to the ocassional one/two week visit. But, nothing during my trips to Puerto Rico contradicts the racial values spoken and accepted by my family, and the Puerto Rican community (I was later to learn that these same values seem to inculcate the latin community.)
I agree with you that Puerto Ricans hold an antipathy to black-americans. They are regarded with contempt, fear, and feelings of superiority. The darkest skinned Puerto Ricans would disparage “los prietos” as distinct, contemptible, and inferior. There is a
feeling of desired separation from afro-americans, even if realty invades, and such physical separateness is not possible.
But among Puerto Ricans of different coloration, separation is not a motivation. Puerto Ricans of all hues interact as boricuas. On the surface, one could not tell that our people are sorted, and classed along racial lines. Unlike the anglo societies, race was not used to segregate communities and facilities (income was the divisor, and wealth accrued to the whites.)
But race is a divisor according to preferred and desireable characteristics in one’s own family. “Mejorando la raza” is a mantra any Puerto Rican I knew, was familiar with, and generally accepted. And “improving” the race was of course marrying someone not darker than yourself, and preferrably, lighter than yourself. It was an imperative passed on to sons and daughters, however mixed the results.
Light skin, and caucasian features, are the preferred characteristics within one’s family. Thus, although within the community, race was not a flashpoint, the prospect of a family member coupling with someone darker could be.
Curiously, this phenomenon is not limited to our community (or the Latin community.) The Afro-American literati have voiced the complaint, and pain of the pigmentocracy (i.e. Spike Lee’s “School Daze” and “Jungle Fever.)
I look forward to your response, and please inform me as to the production date of your play.
RE: Historical View of Slavery
If you do a little research, you will discover that the indigenous people as well as the Africans who were brought here did indeed fare better. Was it good to be conquered by a foreign power? No. Was it good to have your lands taken over and your culture and people decimated in many parts? No. Was it good to be enslaved within your own soil or taken from your soil as slaves to a foreign land? No. Of course not. Perhaps this is all absurd to argue, since we may be looking really at lesser evils. Be this as it may, the Spaniards followed a policy of mestizaje with the indigenous people of Mexico. There was recognition of mixtures, such as mestizo and mulatto. And however abhorrent racism and castes may be, the mixtures as well as races were ranked and accorded privileges. Such was the case with Garcilaso de la Vega, the Peruvian writer of the 18th Century who was half Inca royalty and also half Spanish nobility. He travelled to Spain and petitioned the crown to be accorded all privileges of nobility that, because his father was a nobleman he felt he too should possess. Do you know what the Spanish Crown decided? They granted him his status. If you look at the record, in fact if you look at a kind of painting that was popular in Spain and Latin America called “casta” painting, you will see that there were many of African descent and also of indigenous background who were merchants, were craftsmen, etc. all over Latin America. The casta paintings are clear evidence of the Spanish colonial world. Is it a complete record? Probably not, but you do come away with a surprising slice of that life, spanning several centuries.
As far as spreading Christianity, the reality is the Europeans were killing each other over religion for at least a century and the Americas suffered from the fallout directly. Remember, the colonization of the Americas by the Spanish and later the English and the French, takes place during the Protestant Reformation and the Catholic Counter-Reformation, leading to the Hundred Years War, and full-blown religious intolerance and hatred. What do you expect then?
And do you honestly believe that the Africans who were selling other Africans to the Portugese slave traders are above reproach? Or should there be another moral standard applied to them? I think it’s important to do some research into these areas in order to assess them fairly.
RE: I am in complete agreement
I think culture and education is more important to Latinos than race. I have seen this played out over and over again. I have seen people state or imply certain racial attitudes and have seen their actions completely contradict what they have stated through the friends they keep, their husbands or lovers, and even their families!
Also, I remember reading many years ago that statistically very dark Puerto Ricans were more inclined to speak Spanish openly in order to establish their identity as separate from African Americans. They might even claim not to be black, which ultimately meant something cultural. That is, they were not black Americans. They were Puerto Ricans. I think this happens around Dominicans too. Many non-Latinos and Latinos laugh at Dominicans when they claim not to be black. But I understand what they mean. They are claiming not to be African American. Perhaps this runs a little deeper into their racial attitudes on the island. But I believe that respect must be accorded to a separate and distinct racial system. That is to say, in the Dominican Republic much of the population may see themselves as “white” and the Haitians, for example, as “black.” And what do they mean by this beyond color? Issues of status. Transported to New York, suddenly they are being pushed into an underclass with a different racial system in which they are perceived as black. And people mock them for claiming they are not black. This is a very painful problem because the awareness of race involves seeing oneself through the eyes of the other. And part of what gets played out is asserting your own racial system or being absorbed by the other’s racial system. Cultural clashes are also part and parcel of this whole process because, as most people fail to appreciate or understand, race is completely subjective and culture-bound.
eufemismos
En Puerto Rico definitivamente existen el racismo y son comunes, como señala Hector, los eufemismos. La gente dice “trigueña” o “de color” en vez de simplemente decir negro. Yo no tengo problemas con la palabra trigueño, si uno es trigueño (independientemente de su origen etimológico). Si uno es negro pues no hay porque tratar de ocultarlo. No es malo. Con “de color” ahi si tengo un problema. Porque , ¿como define uno el “ser de color.”?
Ayer estaba hablando con un puertorriqueño, trigueño, aqui en la florida, este muchacho le dice a los negros, morenos, lo cual parece que es práctica común entre los que ya están en un grado avanzado de asimilacion. Y le dice a los estadounidenses blancos, blancos. Como si ellos fueran los unicos blancos del mundo. O sea, para el un puertorriqueño no puede posiblemente ser blanco, un puertorriqueño es sólo “latino” un invento totalmente etnocentrista de la gente en este país. En fin. Si hay racismo en PR, y en los puertorriqueños en EEUU. La pena es que muchas veces los mismos que son discriminados son racistas, aunque inconscientemente como ese muchacho. ( y si hector, como yo que digo que no tengo ningun problema con la palabra trigueño)
RE: eufemismos
To distinguish difference and name it as such is not to be racist. People look different. People are from different races and ethnicities. Even people from the same race can be tall, short, thin, fat, intelligent, not so intelligent, beautiful and ugly. These are all forms of discrimination–in the sense of being discriminating or discerning or having the ability to make distinctions between things. This is not what makes someone racist. Racism is systemic and assumes a power structure that keeps men and women of a particular class, whether racial, economic or ethnic, from participating or accessing certain social benefits–i.e. education, employment, businesses, medicine, etc. Merely observing language in action is not obeserving real action. Although language does hold a key to understanding what has been and what exists.
As I have said in another comment, it is important to see that racial distinctions are culture-bound and ultimately subjective.
RE: RE: Historical View of Slavery
As someone who’s done more than “a little” or “some” research, let me see if my response clarifies our differences. According to your post, people of African or indigenous background, “did indeed fare better”. Where exactly did this occur? Puerto Rico? Just ask the Tainos–oh wait, there are so few left!! Santo Domingo? Haiti? Brazil? In fact, if one looks at the situation today, the greatest wealth among Africans outside of Africa is the United States–a British based slave system; so what?
Secondly, the Spanish “followed a policy of mestizaje” with Indians and Blacks. Of course, this involved (one would guess) a great deal of rape, whether explicitly or implicitly. Did some of the women fall in love with the Spanish? Undoubtedley; however, one can also argue that African-American women in the US also fell in love with some slaveowners. In a system of dominatiion and exploitation, what does this mean? Was it voluntary? A fascinating question. The Spanish established a system where they were on top, a system based on force, intimidation, and genocide–after all it’s easier to control a society where you’ve wiped out a huge number of the population! In fact, the horrors (under which they “fared better”) began in the 15th century, so your example (from the 18th) doesn’t show much more than that there were cases where mixed peoples were recognized as such–again, so what? The same sort of thing also occured in the US (cf. T Jefferson and Sally Hemings). It just shows that there are always exceptions.
If you look at Spanish based countries today (say, Mexico) how many Natives are in positions of real power? How many Afro-Spanish? Just looking at Telemundo and Univision news programs, how many are there of color? If you didn’t know this was Spanish, one could be forgiven for thinking the newscasts were European.In short, the “privileges” which wre “given” to Natives by the Spanish can be seen as one more manipulative way of controlling society (after all, the British ruled India with few British soldiers). Not that there wasn’t a caste system before the Spanish, but that’s another discussion.
Privileges not available to darker skin or Indians were available to those who passed the skin test.
As to the merchants, etc all over Latin America, one should be careful. This is an overly broad and vague statement. For example, how many were merchants? Were there no Afro-American merchants in the US British system? In fact, allowing some members of an oppressed minority to “rise” is just good propaganda–“See? We’re not that bad; after all, some of our darkies own stores!” Afro-Americans in this country were the original jockeys in the Kentucky Derby? So what?
As to the “spreading” of Christianity, again the “reality” is much more complicated. Christians were slaughtering each other as well as Jews, Muslims, “witches” etc. long before they moved their murder to the New World, and other places. In fact, more people have died on the battlefield convinced that their nonsensical and idiotic belief in a deity was correct (god must be horribly confused!). Let’s not forget that the beginning of the horrors (1492) was also the year the Spanish Crown kicked out all the Jews and Muslims who did not convert. The Spanish Inquisitionm is also something that must be kept in mind, for the attitude that a nonCatholic was a heathen who should die, was brought over here–just ask the Aztecs! The killing in Europe, in fact occurs more that “at least a century;” you seem to overlook the six or seven Crusades. (David Stannard’s book, American Holocaust, goes through this quite well and I highly recommend the book)..So, yes “the Americas” suffered from the “fallout.” Of course, the statement obscurs quite a bit of the horror done to them by “christians.” As to the question, “What do you expect then,” you should be careful here–in fact, this is the same type of apologetics I was referrring to here. One can make the following example: The Germans were humiliated after WWI; this leads to a view that the Jews did it; Hitler comes to power; Jews begin to die in huge numbers. What do you expect then? In fact, there is a model, albeit imperfect: it is the early French trappers and mountain men, who lived with and someimes married Indian women. Was it perfect? Not always. Was it a model? Yes, in much the same way that Europeans all throughout the continent “ran away” from their towns and became Indians–that’s why early (American) colonial laws forbid it!
Do I think the Africans who sold each other were above reproach? No, of course not. However, in Africa, slave trading was normal. It did not last all of one’s lives, nor was in inherited from mother to child (the Spanish also, for the most part, took this position unlike the British). To the Africans, this was just one more normal part of “business”. Were Africans even aware that the people sold were not coming back? Probably not. Would this have stopped all slavetrading? No–if there’s a ship with “magic” weapons, and the sailors also have weapons, and there’s a situation of force implied, howmany would stand up and refuse to trade away their “enemies”? Not many, I suspect. To have a situation where one country (because, remember, until 1588, it was Spain that was the dominant power over here) totally wipes out via force (and disease) another set of cultures, forces them to work in mines for gold which also wipes out the Natives (after all, why bother bringing Africans? Because the Indians were dying off like dogs), enslaves the Africans, destroys cultural/religious systems and replaces them with the poison that is Christianity (with such nonsense as virin births, miracles, talking bushes, seas parting, etc) and then using that faith to keep people dominated (don’t worry, god’ll reward you in heaven) does not show how these peoples “fared better.”
Were there differences between the British and Spanish slave systems? Yup, but that’s like asking:did the Nazis and Cambodians murder their victims differently? Sure, but the point is that they murdered!
RE: RE: RE: Historical View of Slavery
No, these weren’t exceptions. Merchants and craftsmen of mixed races were prevalent in areas of the Spanish Empire as early as the late 16th century.
The expulsion of the Jews? The English expelled the Jews in the 14th Century. The French in the mid-15th Century. The Spanish at the end of the 15th Century along with the Muslims who had conquered and occupied the Iberian peninsula for 900 years.
As far as the Spanish decimating the indigenous population: Explain why there are so many Latinos here and in Latin America who are indigenous-looking or mixed with indigenous blood. Everywhere you turn. You will find them. In fact, the typical profile of a Latino is the Spanish/Indian mixture. Everywhere you turn in Latin America or in most parts of Latin America you will find the indigenous presence in the bloodlines of the people. If I look at the United States I do not find this at all. I am, in fact, hard-pressed as Kevin Costner was when he was casting for his film, to find indigenous-looking people. If the U.S./English were so great with the indigenous people then why don’t I see them around me? Where did they magically disappear to?
Further, the basis for international human rights law comes from the Spanish in connection with the indigenous people.
As far as Spanish raping, so did the English, the French and the Dutch although the rap sticks to the Spanish which is absurdly biased. The fact is that the oldest European institutions in the Americas were founded by the Spanish. The earliest architecture, municipalities, churces and universities. I don’t think their legacy is totally reducible to rape and pillage and genocide. I don’t feel my heritage is perhaps yours is.
I bet you liked Amistad which is the most recent anti-Latino film that Hollywood has produced–besides being historically inaccurate.
I also disagree with your characterization of Christianity as a poison. What do you believe in? Like many religions, the aspect of dogma takes ugly forms. But I don’t think the Enlightenment really brought an end to carnage with its movement towards agnosticism and atheism, neither did communism relieve the world of genocide. In fact, it’s going on as we speak. The U.S. directly participated in two major genocidal events in the 20th Century–Hiroshima and Vietnam. Where was the public outcry then?
Ultimately, my point is that my heritage, my background is undeniably linked to the Spanish, the French, the Indian, the African, the Asian and I am quite clear that there have been very deeply disturbing and painful issues surrounding my history and my family. And I embrace all of it as a reflection of my total humanity. My present and future definition of myself is based heavily on how I reconcile these issues. I will not embrace another heritage that I know to have been equally brutal (although most texts do not reflect this) at the expense of my culture, my history and my people.
RE: RE: I am in complete agreement
thank you kiwi smit for such an eloquent summation to my posting. I could not have said better myself. I do hope others read your response!
Vieques and U.S. Racist and Colonial Policy
Dear Compatriots and Friends,
I believe that a racist policy reigns in the minds of many U.S. Congressmen who affirm that Vieques is unique and that thus the U.S. Navy should never stop its use of Vieques as a firing range. Is the uniqueness of Vieques its 9,500 Puerto Ricans who are not U.S. anglo-whites and who don’t live in a free nation? Is this why they can bombard our island but not bomb in their national territory? What do you think? Regards, Hans Perl-Matanzo
RE: RE: RE: RE: Historical View of Slavery
It should be noted that this is my second reply–the first just disappeared, or I did something wrong (damn!).
Let me try and reply to all the points made. It should be noted how you’ve made a few ad hominem attacks–from “some” or “a little” research to the latest about “my heritage” versus “yours,” to betting I liked Amistad. If you’d actually bet, you would have lost–not only was Amistad an insult to Afro-Americans, it made the whites the heroes and conveniently forgot about how then vice-President Adams looked the other way when a similar incident occured (he had bigger things on his mind, the Presidency). Amistad was not anti-Latino, in my view, for it showed the Spanish slave traders for what they were–traffickers in humans (so much for the Chtn view of brotherhood, eh?).
On to other issues. According to you, merchants/craftsmen, etc were “prevalent.” Of course, prevalent is not defined–1 out of every 10 men? 2 out of 10? How “prevalent” is prevalent, anyway? Even if they were prevalent, so what? It’s easier to throw crumbs to peons after you’ve kicked them out of the table–in fact, it probably shows how Chtn one is! Even conceding the point on prevalence, one can make the same argument about blacks in this country–in fact, the first jockeys in the Kentucky Derby were all black slaves (and some free). This country has also had a “prevalent” class of barbers, ministers, craftsmen, etc. who were black–so what? So slavery wasn’t that bad? One has nothing to do with the other.
As to Spanish architecture–again, so what? There were major architectural structures in this part of the world when the Spanish were trying to survive in Muslim Spain. Of course, you seem to ignore that these structures were not only built on the corpses of Natives, they were built on stolen land. Not only that, they also destroyed many architectural marvels–and in the case of the Aztecs, most of the codicies that contained what one must presume to be valuable information (mathematics, plant knowledge, etc). The same holds true for other European nations.
The reason why the “Black Legend” arose is (a) because the Spanish were the empire at the time and went first and (b) because it was TRUE! How many accounts from Spanish hands do we have to read before we acknowledge that fact?
The Spanish influence in the Western Hemisphere were disastrous–as was the British, Dutch, etc. As to Costner being “hard pressed” to find Indians, I’ve got to conclude that’s probably false. I guess he’d never heard of a reservation–perhaps if he’d come to Colorado, where I reside, he would’ve had better luck. The point is, however, that no Euro, Afro or Native American whose family has been in this country, can claim “racial” purity–there are indigenous peoples all throughout the country–it’s just that racist as our country is, it’s not until recent times that one could be proud of that fact.
What do I believ in? Me. You. Children. Family. Friends. People who fall in love with us. I don’t need a deity with rules. And when I look at the Book of Lies (I mean, the Bible) with it’s stories about the sun standing still, or walkin’/talkin’ snakes in some garden, or talking bushes or water to wine or coming back from the dead, I take it about as seriously as Greek or Aztec stories–just stories that are based on fear, ignorance & superstition. What the Enlightenment actually did was not to “end…carnage” as if that’s what it claimed to do, but it reduced god from an everyday explanation to a nonexplanation (good riddance!!). It said that if humans are allowed to think freely, they can (and have) solve how the world works–just human with effort and full of mistakes. That is the legacy of the Enlightenment.
Chty has been a plague on the earth, as well as Islam. Millions have died, and your example of the Jews is instructive, though incomplete. In fact, since the time Chty was legalized in the 300’s, Jews have been ghettoized, discriminated against and hunted down like dogs–all this to “god’s chosen” by Chtns (and Muslims, though not as much). When you can point to the famous atheist-agnostic war, then perhaps we’ll be even (not quite). As to the communism remark, the fact that the old Soviet Union called itself communist, is irrelevant. Nowhere do you find in Marx’s writings any apporval for their genocidal impact (and no, I’m not a Marxist)
Finally, the historical record shows that the US has been participating in foreign genocides since 1898-1900 in the Philippines; what do you think Mr. Reagan (who I hope has a long lingering illness and painful death-more than his victims ever got) was doing in Central Ameica during the 1980s? That was also genocide.
RE: Vieques and U.S. Racist and Colonial Policy
To answer all of your questions, Yes. As a reigning superpower, do you honestly thinks the US political/military elite even gives a shit? Why? They haven’t since 1898, right?
Racist policy against Puerto Rico
Dear Víctor,
I believe that the President of the Unites State is responsible of the U.S. Armed Forces occupation of Puerto Rico and Vieques. One of the reasons behind their use of Vieques as a target practice site is because the U.S. Presidents do not care about the negative effects it has on our population. Their irresponsible and colonial attitude is supported by their racism. As a colony with close to four millian inhabitants who are hispanic and mostly non-anglo, Puerto Rico has become a testing ground for military experiments which they would rather not perform in their homeland. It is our responsibility to struggle against this racist and abusive policy. It is time for us to govern ourselves. We need to become an independent nation so we can ensure that the U.S. Government does not continue to abuse us. Que Viva Puerto Rico Libre, Hans Perl-Matanzo
RE: Peace
Peace.
RE: Racist policy against Puerto Rico
Why are Puerto Ricans complaining? They are US citizens. Why aren’t the Peurto Ricans complaining to their government that wants to keep the US Navy. Do you think that many Peurto Ricans want to give up the comforts of their situation?
You want the US of your island, but alot of you still want the comforts of home.
The US goverment tests alot of sits on American soil. It is the trade offs that alot of Peurto Ricans want to keep, but only on their terms.
RE: RE: Racism in New York Puerto Ricans
As an african american, I agree that latinos ( whatever the race) are culturally different from americans.
What I find amusing is that
1) latinos say that there isn’t any racism
2) all races in latino culture are celebrated
3) african americans are slow stupid etc
4) that african americans are trying to divide themselves when they don’t help latinos
5) african americans are racist just because they don’t support any latino causes.
6) latinos hate the word latino and hispanic but do not want to be classified as white, black, mixed etc.
7) latinos of all races have contempt for a group of people who fought long and hard for everything.
Some african americans that I have talked to feel that latinos are arrogant, unwilling to comprise, don’t know anything about rules and regulations, violent, only care about themselves, and don’t know how to get along with people that don’t speak their language.
Don’t worry I am not interested in latino culture or in a latino man. I just came across this site and was curious.
Where I live there are not many latinos. It is good, because in my city african americans are in a battle with white americans over power, education, money.
It is not like Miami, Florida; New York City, Los Angelos, or Houston,Texas wwhere the Cubans or other latino groups give a hoot about the african americans there.
It is all about power. Race is power.
latinos are not a race but different nationalit
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Historical View of Slavery
The largest slave traders in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, when “Amistad” takes place, are the British. The Spanish were far from being major slave traders, that dubious distinction fell upon the Portuguese and Dutch. By papal decree in the early 16th Century, Spain and Portugal divided the world for conquest. Africa was a Portuguese area so that their slave trading industry flourished along with that of the Dutch who disregarded the pope’s decree. And there are other historical inaccuracies and discrepancies as you point out. I agree with you that many African-Americans were offended that a “white man” again had to save them. This is a typical Hollywood ploy. But I also agree with Mr. Smit that the film is directly anti-Spanish and anti-Hispanic on many different levels that harken back to the old Hollywood depictions of the Spanish–and by default Latinos. I don’t recall the name of the English historian who is actually an expert on slavery and had actually published a voluminous study on slavery when “Amistad” was released, but in his article, which appeared in the New York Times OpEd Page, he stated that the film was completely inaccurate and misrepresented the British role in the slave trade.
RE: RE: Racist policy against Puerto Rico
Not to come across as to harsh, but it seems to me you don’t quite know what you’re talking about. The people of Vieques have always been opposedto the Naval presence. In fact, the US government promised to return the island after WWII was over, but decided after the war, that the island was valuable because it would protect the sea lanes and provide training for soldiers. The Puerto Rican government (the current one) actually wants the islands back and returned to as pristine a condition as possible.
As to PR’s being US citizens: they are and they aren’t. I mean, they don’t pay federal taxes and can’t vote for President, but they are US citizens by birth. Actually, it’s a wierd situation to be in, not seen in virtually no part of the world. Besides, if as you claim we are US citizens, then why can’t we complain?
Your last point was that the US government has experimented/tested on US soil. Don’t the people of Utah and Nevada complain? You betch. Why? Because there’s been a pattern of US government experimentation of its citizens, especially post WWII–see the recent excellent book, The Plutonium Files.
Actually, themore I reread your post, the more insulting it becomes. “Comforts of home?” Gimme a break.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Historical View of Slavery
It might have been Hugh Thomas’ book, The Slave Trade. I may have to go back and see Amistad again to pick up the anti-Spanish bias, since the first time, I was so agitated at the whole film, it might have missed the bias. Personally, I don’t think it’s too big a deal, in the sense that Hollywood never gets the history right. As to thebias, that is a longstanding complaint–look at the TV boycott by minorities as a whole. Again, my impression was not that the film had many examples of anti-Spanish bias, but that once again, helpless Africans had to be saved by (Christian) males. The irony of Christians owning slaves, is of course, not too major a point. 🙂
On an unrelated point, though Mr. Smit and I disagree, I found the email exchanges to be enlightening. Muchas gracias, caballero.
Hans Perl-Matanzo is an Independentista
The only you support the idea of the U.S. getting out of Vieques is that you are a damn INDEPENDENTISTA, a person who wants to separate us from the greatest nation in the history of the world, and I won’t let you do that. Hans, you do not understand that without the United States and their money we would be starving to death and cutting sugar cane. We need the United States, even if they bomb us, we have to accept it because we live from them. Basically, we are their bitch, and we have to do what they tell us we have to do, but that is much better than independence! I love the American Flag and what it has done for me, it has given me a country to be proud of, with history and proud people that are willing to fight and die for it. I won’t let you make Puerto Rico into a Republic because then we would become communist and we would have to leave to Miami. Statehood Forever!!!
RE: Vieques and U.S. Racist and Colonial Policy
Something to think about……….
Is it a racist policy that causes all
the harm and pain in whatever country
it may be that is hurt by war,blight,
hunger or harm? Or is it a matter of greed and egos that perpetrate harm
on the weaker powers?
Boricuas and Race
I was unable to access replies posted to the comments on Puertorican race relations… so I am afraid that what I’m about to write may be redundant. Nonetheless, here I go…
I am angry. It seems that la mentalidad anglosajona has really gotten to you guys. Except for the postings entitled “Racism and New York Puerto Ricans” and “Diverse and I like it like that”, the other postings seem to be dominated by the North American concepts of “race.”
Firstly, when you talk about race within the Latin American context, the definition of “race” is very different from the black/while dualistic mentality of mainstream United States culture because of our unique inter and intra racial history. Puerto Ricans, in particular, have race classifications that vary from family to family and from pueblo to pueblo – a person can be “jabao”” or “cano,” “achinao,” or “angolo.” A “jabao,” for example, is a blond haired, white-skinned Puerto Rican who has African features. Someone who is “blanquito” for Puerto Ricans may be a “black” for an American Anglo. Because of this, a Puerto Rican from the island and one from the U.S. may have very different ideas about what “race” means. Thus, we must be VERY careful about what our frame of reference is when we talk about Puerto Ricans and race.
Secondly, Puerto Rico is a “white” island in comparison to the rest of the carribean islands, not so much because of Spanish slave policy, but because historically there was enough cheap European and creole
labor to go around so that by the late nineteenth century African slave labor was not as “necessary” as it was on other islands. (Check out some history books).
Having said that, let me go on about my own personal experience as a blanquita Boricua, growing up in Newark, New Jersey (a predominantly African American city, with a large Puerto Rican minority). I will start by saying that I have NEVER felt priviledged or have received preferential treatment because my skin is white. I had to fight tooth and nail to prove I was just as “black” as my African-American sisters and just as deserving as my Anglo-American sisters. Having to expend so much energy to define and empower myself is, of course, a by-product of growing up in this sick racist US culture. I do not know if I would have had such a clear sense of identity and of self it I had grown up in Puerto Rico. So, I count my “racial tribulations” as a blessing.
In fact, as a teenager I was not happy that I was so white, because it seemed all the guys preferred darker complexions…as I did. As a college student, I was made to feel guilty about my European heritage, until I learned that my family, as well as many other Puerto Rican jibaro families, had never owned slaves, but instead came from a long line of agricultural laborers who worked long and hard hours to make a meager living. In fact, many of these families were the ones who were compelled to migrate to the United States in search of El Sueno Americano.
The only vestiges of racisim I can recall, is perhaps my family’s concern that I marry outside my culture. It had very little to do with race and more with my family’s fear that an African-American, Anglo-American or a South-American, may not appreciate my Puerto Ricaness or may have preconceived prejudices about who I was (for example, that idea that all Puertorican women are “hot”). Marrying a “black” Puertorican was not a problem. A Puertorican was a “Puertorican” no matter what color his skin was. For a long time, I shied away from dating outside my culture for fear I would be the “flavor of the month.”
From my visits to the island, I have observed that race has less to do with relationships among Puertoricans than class. In Puerto Rico, class standing and political connections seemed a much more significant barometer of diferential treatment than race.
To a lesser degree, this is also true in the US… but it’s not exciting enough for the media to report on. Culture and class create diferential treatment among Anglos and among peoples of African ancestory. Jamaicans dont like African-Americans, and African-Americans dont like Haitians. Blue-blood WASPs are not too crazy about Italian-Americans and middle class “white-folks” are not crazy about “white trash.”
I know I may have confused some of you because I have skipped from topic to topic and made many generalizations. My excuse is that in order to develop all the issues encompased within a question like, “What are race relations like among Puerto Ricans on the island and the US?”, I would need to write a book!
My main point is that such a topic cannot be approached with a cavalier attitude. There are many variables we must consider. Otherwise, we would run the risk of misrepresenting the truth. I am not saying that what others have posted is not true, or that their experiences are not valid… just that it is not the complete story.
Paz y Solaridad,
Cotorrita
RE: Boricuas and Race
The “complete story” should probably start out with the fact that there is no such thing as race, anyway. It’s like looking at a rose, a carnation and an orchid and saying, “The race of carnations is better than the race of roses.” If anyone said that (and meant it) wouldn’t we think they were insane? Yet, when people talk about “black” v. “white,” it’s taken seriously. Why? Because unlike roses or carnations, humans have the power to separate others. In fact, from a biological point of view, if you are “white,” it means you suffer from a melanin deficiency–it actually comes as quite a revelation to most people.
In fact, it occursto me that the whole discussion is misplaced–if we grant the nonexistence of any race but the human one, then basically we’re fighting over which skin color is the best; “the sound of fury, signifying nothing.”
I don’t think any of the replies implied theirs was the only truth, and I don’t think any of us were misrepresenting the “truth”. We just don’t always agree on everything. To which I say, thank god!
PS–If you write your book, all of us will get a free copy, right? 🙂
RE: RE: Vieques and U.S. Racist and Colonial Policy
Why the dichotomy? Could it be alot of factors, with some more important (or assumed) than others?It seems to me that racism is not only a policy, but a justification for that policy. “Why do we discriminate against Afro-Americans? Because they’re black. So? That means they’re inferior to us. Then let’s enslave them and brutalize their women.”
RE: Hans Perl-Matanzo is an Independentista
I will not speak for Mr. Matanzo–he can (and I’m sure will) speak for himself. I gotta say, though, that the tone of your reply is unnecessarily harsh. If the man is a “damn independentista,” so what? Can PR’s not agree on this point without being attacked? Why “damn,” not just an independentista? Well, he’ll respond on his own.
The US “the greatest nation in the history of the world?” In a word, bullshit. There is no difference in the actions of the US, British or Roman Empires, except in the level of cruelty inflicted on the world. The US slaughtered its indigeneous population, enslaved Africans, stole land from Mexicans and subjugated women. Guess we disagree on the word “great.” The US also experimented on its peoples since WWII, and has managed to maintain a system where political and economic elites (who, in a pure coincidence, I’m sure) have happened to by Anglo males.
The fact that people are willing to die for a piece of cloth called the flag is to me a pretty disgusting notion. War is the slaughter of the innocent, based on lies and organized by national leaders–and the armies are composed of overwhelming numbers of the poor. Yeah, it makes my heart go pitter patter every time I see the Stars and Stripes.
PR “becoming Communist?” First, there never was a Communist country in the world–all one has to do is sit down and read anything by Karl Marx and see if after doing so, one can honestly say that the Soviet Union (or Cuba, for that matter) was and is Communist. No–they are/were totalitarian dictatorships, nothing more, nothing less. Besides, what’s wrong with Miami? 🙂
RE: Racist policy against Puerto Rico
I totally agree–there’s a great book which traces all (including Clinton) of the Presidents’ racist views. It’s called, Nixon’s Piano.
In all fairness, the US Government has been testing on its citizens, especially since WWII, mostly nuclear “stuff”. I honestly don’t expect anything different for a brown-skinned, Spanish-speaking country.
RE: Racist policy against Puerto Rico
Sir,I am Puerto Rican and proud of it, but I hope that Puerto Rico never becomes an independent nation. I think that should take a trip into Latin America and experience the hardships that these people are going through. you need to explore the problems that all of these independent countries are having and have had for years. Let me tell you that a lot of these countries have vast amounts of natural resources, we cannot say the same about Puerto Rico. I am glad of the fact that the independence movement is very small and I hope and pray that it keeps getting smaller.
Atentamente
A concern Boricua
RE: Boricuas and Race
Right on, sister!
RE: Hans Perl-Matanzo is an Independentista
I think you’re in the wrong discussion board. This one’s on race relations. Be that as it may. Puerto Rico may have undergone a great amount of development that integrated her economy to the U.S. and allowed the Americans to create an exclusive subsidized market for their products–which, by the way, is at present more a hindrance than an aid. As such, the development of the infrastructure that Munoz Marin hoped for was somewhat achieved. The question is what is the next step for Puerto Rico? Every nation, whether previously a colony or not must ask itself this question when an impasse or a stagnant condition exists (which is the case in Puerto Rico). The American colonies asked this when it braved independence. The French asked this when they defied their aristocracy. South Africa asked this when the U.S. applied economic pressures to bring the apartheid regime down. I do not believe the independentistas hate the Americans or wish them harm unless they want to harm Puerto Rico. (And its starting to look more and more that way as more information is released on Vieques) It is more a matter of confronting our own reality as a separate people with a distinct culture and history that is different from the Anglo-American past. Sure there’s some commonality, but the reality is that we are Latin Americans. This is undeniable. And even more specifically, we are Caribeños with a very rich language, culture and history. Thank God for this website. Live and learn my friend. You sound like you have a very big complejo about being Puerto Rican and that you devalue who you are. Worst of all, you devalue your family and a people of whom you obviously know very little. We have many fine writers, artists, scholars, statesmen, musicians and scientists. In fact, it’s amazing how many there are, considering our size! Just look at the brains in these discussion boards. I exhort you to try to learn more about who we are.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Historical View of Slavery
Brazil has the highest percentage of black slaves. The highest percentage of black people outside of Nigeria.
Most of the slaves sent to the US died on the way over there. Most of the slaves were sent to the Caribbean, South America, and Central America.
We are diverse and I like that
Puerto Ricans are pretty diverse within their families–even within their immediate families. I know within my own family we have whites, obvious mixtures with Africans, not so obvious mixtures with Tainos and combinations of all three. In addition, we also have combinations with Asians, African- and white Americans, and other Latinos that reflect our more recent historical/social reality. Within our family, we all seem to get along. I mean as much as families in general do–probably better, I like to think. Disagreements have nothing to do with race. There is however an awareness that some of us are ‘achinao’ or ‘trigueño’ or ‘rubia’. I personally like the fact that my family is so racially varied.
We came to the States before I was born and so I can’t really comment on race relations on the island except as it was carried over by our first generation to arrive in New York. There were definite attitudes, I believe, that suggested white was better, yet, at the same time there was an openess or receptivity towards other groups. For example, I always thought it was interesting that some of my aunts married Filipinos here in New York and that others came with their Puerto Rican husbands who were white like themselves. My uncles however all married darker Puerto Rican women or ‘trigueñas’ on the island. In my immediate family, my mother who is the blood sister to my aunts and uncles, is darker than them because her father was different, my grandfather who I never met and whose picture I have never seen must have been mixed with Taino and African blood. My father was a white Puerto Rican. I myself look white. My closest cousins, however, are Filipino and Puerto Rican. And my favorite uncle, who died a few years ago, was Filipino.
Racismo en Puerto Rico
Diaz Blanco already said that, “Puerto Rico es la mas blanca de las Antillas”. Not anything to be proud of but a process of racial genocide that most of us try to hide. My bisabuelo, Antonio Rosario, son of slaves born in 1887 in the Island of Vieques, married a mestiza “pa mejorar la raza”. Mi abuelo, did the same thing, and so did my father. The result, a light skin Puerto Rican, me. Although it is not my intent, I might even be accusing my ancestors of partaking in this cultural genocide that lives undisturbed in Puerto Rico. Racism is a plague deep-rooted in our history. Once we accept that, we might be able to do something about it.
P.D. Did you know that about three years ago in Halloween the students of the UPR Law School painted themselves brown and their lips white, imitating that great bigot of ours, Diplo? Interesting, no?
RE: We are diverse and I like that
The word “trigue~na” tacitly implies racism. It could loosely be translated, based on its etimological root, trigo, “like wheat”. The resemblance of wheat and Black people escapes me. It is a word that is used as a euphemism when referring to people of marked African decent. To try to sound apologetic only proves my previous claim in another message that racism in Puerto Rico is, to quote Bruce Lee, ‘alive and kicking.”
RE: We are diverse and I like that
That’s funny, but I’m trigueña and have always felt that the word had a positive connotation–almost suggesting a dark beauty. Trigueña means a kind of bronze skin tone that can be either Taino or a mixture of African and Spanish. I never thought of it being exclusively associated with African people, but that it could include indigenous people and Asians as well.
RE: Racismo en Puerto Rico
That is to say, then, that race relations are poor on the island? The fact that of the Great Antilles, Puerto Rico has the largest number of whites is basically descriptive. Although, there is a historical explanation for it that is not completely reducible to genocide. Five or six years ago, the Performing Garage in New York City, a very well established and highly respected experimental theatre, did a production of Arthur Miller’s The Crucible, and also used white actors with painted black faces and painted white lips. It was quite shocking. Then there was the parade of fire fighters who also thought it was funny to impersonate black men somewhere in a New York suburb. How are we to understand these? As isolated incidents of an extreme and offensive nature or as a systemic condition that most members of society accept and participate in?
Why is there so much interracial marriage in Puerto Rico? What is the history of this? Certainly, this practice is not reducible simply to an example of cultural or racial genocide? Although, I could see segregationists arguing as much.
There is racism but I would like to see all the contradiction laid out without accusatory tones–although, if need be, that’s okay. And I would like, through specific examples, to know from others where they have experienced racism from another Puerto Rican and also when they have not. Also, I believe class issues come into play here a great deal. And perhaps, there is an opportunity here to look at how class plays into all of this. Especially, your example of the UPR which is, although a public university, the mainstay of the upper classes of Puerto Rico. The upper classes in all societies are the most conservative and least in touch with social trends that run like a river below them.
RE: RE: Racismo en Puerto Rico
I remember one time saying at a friend’s house that I wanted to visit the Congo. His automatic reply was, “Why go there? Just go to Loiza. They’re all the same.”
I have to say that even Cortijo, one of the main exponents of “negrura” in Puerto Rico, ridiculed his ancestors with “El Negro bembon”. I know of only two Black Puerto Ricans (and this is not an oxymoron) who are actively involved in studying la negrura in Puerto Rico from Marcus Garvey’s perspective. Some people say they are Puerto Rican first and then Black. My friends understand that being Black is a millenary issue, while being Puerto Rican is a historical accident of at most half a millenium.
RE: RE: We are diverse and I like that
Feeling that a word has a positive connotation has little to do with the true meaning of the word.
Besides, have’t you heard people saying in an obvious apologetic manner, “El el trigue~no.” Then when you look at him he’s complexion is one of the darkest there is. Puerto Ricans don’t dare say, “El es negro.” many people think this is even an insult but if they call you “jabao”, or “indio”, or “cano’, everything is fine. (Of course, if they call you “indio” in Mexico it can be seen as an insult. Phrases like, “Ay, no seas tan india” plague Mexican Spanish.
To be Black in Puerto Rico like in the Americas is almost a sin.
telenovelas
Yo aborrezco las telenovelas, pero si las tomamos como elemento que refleja la cultura popular, resulta interesante preguntarse cuantas actrices y actores negros han protagonizado una telenovela en Puerto Rico. No sera porque no resultan esteticamente dignos para los productores?
RE: RE: RE: We are diverse and I like that
Feeling that a word has a positive connotation is indeed part of the meaning of the word. All you have been describing are negative connotations. But the fact is that there was colonialism and that there is the legacy of colonialism and the conditions of history in which we all live. Your comments basically serve as a partial lexicon of racial attitudes that reflect that legacy.
Further, approaches to language usage are useful to a certain extent. The reality is that indigenous and African peoples fared better among the Spanish than they did among the English during the colonial period. But these are very complex issues and there are regional variations that must be identified and accounted for.
My understanding is that trigueño is cafe con leche and that negro is black. And I have heard their usage as basically descriptive. I myself have used these expressions in a neutral way, just as I use blanco or rubio. I have never heard trigueño used euphemistically to mean black. But of course I believe you have and could see how, given the colonial values that are a part of all cultures of the Americas, this would be the case. But I believe again that this is but one dimension or approach to the issue of race relations.
RE: RE: RE: RE: We are diverse and I like that
Yes, Kiwi, you’re right when you imply that the popular connotation of a word is part of its meaning. I admit I didn’t choose my words wisely.
However, words like trigueno as precisely the ones that complicate racial matters even more in Puerto Rico because within their conception there’s a tacit implication to ignore the subject. You have to polarize first to weed out the people who won’t take a stand, then from there might arise hope for a constructive dialogue or a resolution. If Malcolm X would’ve not taken his radical stands on being Black, who knows how much worse Blacks inthis country would be. It you read Malcolm’s last written in Mecca, then you start seeing how a metamorphosis was taking place, without abandoning his firm stand. Unfortunately, he was murdered before he could reformulate his thinking.
Diplo
Hector,
Could you comment about what you said about Diplo, i.e. tha he’s a “bigot”?
I would like to know more about this popular 1950s television character and what you think about him.
Hector Rosario wrote:
P.D. Did you know that about three years
ago in Halloween the students of the UPR
Law School painted themselves brown and
their lips white, imitating that great
bigot of ours, Diplo? Interesting, no?
Racism in New York Puerto Ricans
I have observed from Puerto Ricans in New York that we are Puerto Rican “first” and light or dark skinned “second.” I find from my experiences that racist remarks seem to be more prevalent when Puerto Ricans are referring to moreno-Americanos (whatever that means) as opposed to moreno Puertorriqueno–which is, by the way, a term I, personally, have never heard. My paternal aunt and maternal uncle were very racist against non-spanish-speaking blacks. If they were spanish-speaking dark-skinned people they would never refer to them as negro but rather Cubano, Puertorriqueno, Dominicano, etc. Bye the way this forum is very timely with respect to a play that I am working on putting up soon entitled “Closing Doors”. It deals pricisely with Puerto Ricans and the issues revolving around skin color, “pelo malo” and the anglosizing (sp?) of our people. –Paz!
RE: RE: Racismo en Puerto Rico
If this has already been discussed, then forgive the repetitiveness. However, what of Black Latinos? “Regular” PR’s will make disparaging remarks in Spanish, thinking that the person is black, and therefore doesn’t understand. Or what of PR mothers of aprevious generation discouraging their daughters from marrying a black Latino–it might darken the race. According to Census figures, Latinos will be the largest minority group in a few years. I shudder to think what’ll happen to blacks. Will Latinos see them as allies? As competitors who can be blamed for social conditions? Of course, by playing this stupid game, we engage in the same “divide and conquer” crap that allows the dominant part of society to laigh all the way to the bank!
Historical View of Slavery
I believe it was Mr. Smit who noted that under the Spanish, indigenous and African peoples “fared better” than under the British. This view (common among Latinos, and which serves as an apologetic defense) has got to be challenged, and ultimately rejected as false.
It was under the Spanish (first the Portugese) that the apalling slave trade and native peoples genocide began. It was under the Spanish that Mexico (Aztecs), Incas, etc. died, mostly by “germ warfare”, but also by massive genocidal acts. Let’s not forget it was Columbus’ diary that notes how several Indians were taken by force to help him find gold. Did the natives “fare better” under the British? Look around–I read with sadness the other day how American Indians own about 3% of the US landmass–is this progress? After all, they once owned 100%! In addition, the Spanish did not bother with “improving” slaves’ conditions. Why? Because they saw the black as an animal, and if he died, then one could go out and get another one. Of course, the British just wiped out the Indians in god’s name! Lastly, force and violence are the reason most of Latin America is Christian–sometimes the sword followed the missionaries and sometimes the missionaries followed the sword. Besides, its ridiculous belief system–virgins? talkin’ and walkin’ snakes? man walking on water?–does anyone honestly think that the Tainos woke up one day, and said, “By god, we’ve been wrong all this time! It’s Jesus, who’s the answer!”? No, it was one more way of colonizing people-attack their belief system and you’re halfway there to conquering them completely!
Indians and blacks faring better under the Spanish? Not so.
RE: Racism in New York Puerto Ricans
Your aunt and uncle call them Cubano, or Boricua because they ARE Cubano or Boricua, not like the Moreno Americanos who are not hispanic. We both have the African blood but raised different and we have the other cultural combos in us(taino, Spain) like that. Moreno Americanos are raised like Americans. They are very different from us based on upbringing and the bloodline.
Race relations among Puerto Ricans
I have been reading the messages regarding this subject. I agree with many of the views. Growing up in Jersey City, NJ, it was understood a girl married a lighter skinned Puerto Rican if she was dark skinned to “improve the race”. In fact, that is exactly what I did – although not intentionally. I knew dad would not accept a darker skinned son in law no matter what the race! This was ingrained from infancy. This aside, I remember hearing stories about the superiority of the lighter skinned PR over the darker skinned PR – the darker skinned person doing domestic work to get by (my mom did just that).
Why? I do not understand this. Even anglos ask if there are racial and class differences among the different skin tones in the island. Although I was raised here and do not know what life is like on the island, based on statements from family and friends, I had to say, yes. Why is that? Could it be the work of the Spaniards when they colonized the island? How about Puerto Ricans in the mainland? Are we imitating the white man’s view of dark skin and its worth in society?
Again, I ask, why is that??
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: We are diverse and I like that
Hector, you are taking this racism thing WAY too seriously. Puerto Rico, as you know is comprised of the several colors of skin, and we’re okay with that. so we call some triguenos, or rubias, or even coloraos, sometimes pecoso(a). well, that’s how the puertorrican describes people, and those on the island KNOW that it’s not a negative thing! maybe our previous generations did, but we never use those terms in a negative connotation. the new Puerto Rico is one filled with deep love for the culture, and the youth of Puerto Rico are the ones embracing the old traditions and loving and accepting everything about Puerto Rico. I don’t think that you need to bring malcom x into the picture here, that type of racism does not exist on our island.
RE: RE: RE: Racismo en Puerto Rico
Hector, what is your beef with Puerto Rico and it’s african history? We all love and embrace los negros de la isla. we even honor and recite poetry that describe the negro in puerto rico. ‘Por la encendida calle antillana, rumba-macumba-candonde-bambula, entre dos filas de negras caras, ante ella un congo, bongo y maracas…’ we love it! it’s contributed to who the puertorrican is today! you can see it in our people, you can hear it in our music, you can feel it in our essence. the african negro was, will and always will be part of the puertorrican culture, and we are proud of that! being a negro en puerto rico never has, nor never will be this horrifying racial issue on the island that you’re describing . there will always be people who will be racist among any culture, but puerto rico, as a pueblo embrace the black, taino and spanish cultures that comprise who we are today! viva puerto rico y su diversidad!
RE: Race relations among Puerto Ricans
It’s called internalization–think about it. Those of us who grew up with the “electronic babysitter,” saw (and still see) the assumptions, value system, etc growing up. Think about this fact: even today, whenever there’s a new toy, say a play oven, most of the time they are gender specific: so, using the stove example, chances are you’ll see girls playing with the oven and boys with cars. The implication is that girls cook and boys drive cars. It’s gotten a little better, but the basic assumptions are still there. So, dark-skinned Latinos are drug dealers and cannot speak English very well in the movies we watch, while the lighter ones have good jobs and are fluent. Look at Univision’s or Telemundo’s news programs. How many darker skinned people are there as reporters or analysts? Virtually none. Whenever a minority group tries to emulate the majority group, they internalize the group’s views. See my previous message on how this has played out in terms of religion–is it a coincidence that Latin America is predominately Christian? Would it be different, if say, China had conquered this hemisphere? Yup, most Latinos would probably be Buddhist or Confucian.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: We are diverse and I like that
Well, Miss Rubia, I would certainly agree with that. I think we should worry whether or not we speak the Spanish language correctly if we Mainlanders visit the island. That’s when we might be ridiculed or “looked at in a funny way”. All of the views outlined prove that we must work together as a people – view each other as equals no matter what color – and treat each other with respect, whether we are here or there. Once we get past that, these race/color issues will stop being such a big deal. Can we just get along?
RE: We are diverse and I like that
I am from Miami,FL.. I am Puertrican descent.My family is diverse in color. There are whites,blacks,brown,etc..I learned to appreciate the different colors or shades of skin in our family.This appreciation that I instilled in my upbringing, helped me to understand the ignorance of people. Martin Luther King Jr. said it best,”Don’t judge a person by the color of their skin,but judge him/her by the content of their character.” This quote knocks out all stereotypes.If people would learn and understand this quote from the heart,mind,and soul racism would abolish.
RE: Racism in New York Puerto Ricans
Gloria:
I was born and raised here in the United States. I have never lived in Puerto Rico; my time there has been lmited to the ocassional one/two week visit. But, nothing during my trips to Puerto Rico contradicts the racial values spoken and accepted by my family, and the Puerto Rican community (I was later to learn that these same values seem to inculcate the latin community.)
I agree with you that Puerto Ricans hold an antipathy to black-americans. They are regarded with contempt, fear, and feelings of superiority. The darkest skinned Puerto Ricans would disparage “los prietos” as distinct, contemptible, and inferior. There is a
feeling of desired separation from afro-americans, even if realty invades, and such physical separateness is not possible.
But among Puerto Ricans of different coloration, separation is not a motivation. Puerto Ricans of all hues interact as boricuas. On the surface, one could not tell that our people are sorted, and classed along racial lines. Unlike the anglo societies, race was not used to segregate communities and facilities (income was the divisor, and wealth accrued to the whites.)
But race is a divisor according to preferred and desireable characteristics in one’s own family. “Mejorando la raza” is a mantra any Puerto Rican I knew, was familiar with, and generally accepted. And “improving” the race was of course marrying someone not darker than yourself, and preferrably, lighter than yourself. It was an imperative passed on to sons and daughters, however mixed the results.
Light skin, and caucasian features, are the preferred characteristics within one’s family. Thus, although within the community, race was not a flashpoint, the prospect of a family member coupling with someone darker could be.
Curiously, this phenomenon is not limited to our community (or the Latin community.) The Afro-American literati have voiced the complaint, and pain of the pigmentocracy (i.e. Spike Lee’s “School Daze” and “Jungle Fever.)
I look forward to your response, and please inform me as to the production date of your play.
RE: Historical View of Slavery
If you do a little research, you will discover that the indigenous people as well as the Africans who were brought here did indeed fare better. Was it good to be conquered by a foreign power? No. Was it good to have your lands taken over and your culture and people decimated in many parts? No. Was it good to be enslaved within your own soil or taken from your soil as slaves to a foreign land? No. Of course not. Perhaps this is all absurd to argue, since we may be looking really at lesser evils. Be this as it may, the Spaniards followed a policy of mestizaje with the indigenous people of Mexico. There was recognition of mixtures, such as mestizo and mulatto. And however abhorrent racism and castes may be, the mixtures as well as races were ranked and accorded privileges. Such was the case with Garcilaso de la Vega, the Peruvian writer of the 18th Century who was half Inca royalty and also half Spanish nobility. He travelled to Spain and petitioned the crown to be accorded all privileges of nobility that, because his father was a nobleman he felt he too should possess. Do you know what the Spanish Crown decided? They granted him his status. If you look at the record, in fact if you look at a kind of painting that was popular in Spain and Latin America called “casta” painting, you will see that there were many of African descent and also of indigenous background who were merchants, were craftsmen, etc. all over Latin America. The casta paintings are clear evidence of the Spanish colonial world. Is it a complete record? Probably not, but you do come away with a surprising slice of that life, spanning several centuries.
As far as spreading Christianity, the reality is the Europeans were killing each other over religion for at least a century and the Americas suffered from the fallout directly. Remember, the colonization of the Americas by the Spanish and later the English and the French, takes place during the Protestant Reformation and the Catholic Counter-Reformation, leading to the Hundred Years War, and full-blown religious intolerance and hatred. What do you expect then?
And do you honestly believe that the Africans who were selling other Africans to the Portugese slave traders are above reproach? Or should there be another moral standard applied to them? I think it’s important to do some research into these areas in order to assess them fairly.
RE: I am in complete agreement
I think culture and education is more important to Latinos than race. I have seen this played out over and over again. I have seen people state or imply certain racial attitudes and have seen their actions completely contradict what they have stated through the friends they keep, their husbands or lovers, and even their families!
Also, I remember reading many years ago that statistically very dark Puerto Ricans were more inclined to speak Spanish openly in order to establish their identity as separate from African Americans. They might even claim not to be black, which ultimately meant something cultural. That is, they were not black Americans. They were Puerto Ricans. I think this happens around Dominicans too. Many non-Latinos and Latinos laugh at Dominicans when they claim not to be black. But I understand what they mean. They are claiming not to be African American. Perhaps this runs a little deeper into their racial attitudes on the island. But I believe that respect must be accorded to a separate and distinct racial system. That is to say, in the Dominican Republic much of the population may see themselves as “white” and the Haitians, for example, as “black.” And what do they mean by this beyond color? Issues of status. Transported to New York, suddenly they are being pushed into an underclass with a different racial system in which they are perceived as black. And people mock them for claiming they are not black. This is a very painful problem because the awareness of race involves seeing oneself through the eyes of the other. And part of what gets played out is asserting your own racial system or being absorbed by the other’s racial system. Cultural clashes are also part and parcel of this whole process because, as most people fail to appreciate or understand, race is completely subjective and culture-bound.
eufemismos
En Puerto Rico definitivamente existen el racismo y son comunes, como señala Hector, los eufemismos. La gente dice “trigueña” o “de color” en vez de simplemente decir negro. Yo no tengo problemas con la palabra trigueño, si uno es trigueño (independientemente de su origen etimológico). Si uno es negro pues no hay porque tratar de ocultarlo. No es malo. Con “de color” ahi si tengo un problema. Porque , ¿como define uno el “ser de color.”?
Ayer estaba hablando con un puertorriqueño, trigueño, aqui en la florida, este muchacho le dice a los negros, morenos, lo cual parece que es práctica común entre los que ya están en un grado avanzado de asimilacion. Y le dice a los estadounidenses blancos, blancos. Como si ellos fueran los unicos blancos del mundo. O sea, para el un puertorriqueño no puede posiblemente ser blanco, un puertorriqueño es sólo “latino” un invento totalmente etnocentrista de la gente en este país. En fin. Si hay racismo en PR, y en los puertorriqueños en EEUU. La pena es que muchas veces los mismos que son discriminados son racistas, aunque inconscientemente como ese muchacho. ( y si hector, como yo que digo que no tengo ningun problema con la palabra trigueño)
RE: eufemismos
To distinguish difference and name it as such is not to be racist. People look different. People are from different races and ethnicities. Even people from the same race can be tall, short, thin, fat, intelligent, not so intelligent, beautiful and ugly. These are all forms of discrimination–in the sense of being discriminating or discerning or having the ability to make distinctions between things. This is not what makes someone racist. Racism is systemic and assumes a power structure that keeps men and women of a particular class, whether racial, economic or ethnic, from participating or accessing certain social benefits–i.e. education, employment, businesses, medicine, etc. Merely observing language in action is not obeserving real action. Although language does hold a key to understanding what has been and what exists.
As I have said in another comment, it is important to see that racial distinctions are culture-bound and ultimately subjective.
RE: RE: Historical View of Slavery
As someone who’s done more than “a little” or “some” research, let me see if my response clarifies our differences. According to your post, people of African or indigenous background, “did indeed fare better”. Where exactly did this occur? Puerto Rico? Just ask the Tainos–oh wait, there are so few left!! Santo Domingo? Haiti? Brazil? In fact, if one looks at the situation today, the greatest wealth among Africans outside of Africa is the United States–a British based slave system; so what?
Secondly, the Spanish “followed a policy of mestizaje” with Indians and Blacks. Of course, this involved (one would guess) a great deal of rape, whether explicitly or implicitly. Did some of the women fall in love with the Spanish? Undoubtedley; however, one can also argue that African-American women in the US also fell in love with some slaveowners. In a system of dominatiion and exploitation, what does this mean? Was it voluntary? A fascinating question. The Spanish established a system where they were on top, a system based on force, intimidation, and genocide–after all it’s easier to control a society where you’ve wiped out a huge number of the population! In fact, the horrors (under which they “fared better”) began in the 15th century, so your example (from the 18th) doesn’t show much more than that there were cases where mixed peoples were recognized as such–again, so what? The same sort of thing also occured in the US (cf. T Jefferson and Sally Hemings). It just shows that there are always exceptions.
If you look at Spanish based countries today (say, Mexico) how many Natives are in positions of real power? How many Afro-Spanish? Just looking at Telemundo and Univision news programs, how many are there of color? If you didn’t know this was Spanish, one could be forgiven for thinking the newscasts were European.In short, the “privileges” which wre “given” to Natives by the Spanish can be seen as one more manipulative way of controlling society (after all, the British ruled India with few British soldiers). Not that there wasn’t a caste system before the Spanish, but that’s another discussion.
Privileges not available to darker skin or Indians were available to those who passed the skin test.
As to the merchants, etc all over Latin America, one should be careful. This is an overly broad and vague statement. For example, how many were merchants? Were there no Afro-American merchants in the US British system? In fact, allowing some members of an oppressed minority to “rise” is just good propaganda–“See? We’re not that bad; after all, some of our darkies own stores!” Afro-Americans in this country were the original jockeys in the Kentucky Derby? So what?
As to the “spreading” of Christianity, again the “reality” is much more complicated. Christians were slaughtering each other as well as Jews, Muslims, “witches” etc. long before they moved their murder to the New World, and other places. In fact, more people have died on the battlefield convinced that their nonsensical and idiotic belief in a deity was correct (god must be horribly confused!). Let’s not forget that the beginning of the horrors (1492) was also the year the Spanish Crown kicked out all the Jews and Muslims who did not convert. The Spanish Inquisitionm is also something that must be kept in mind, for the attitude that a nonCatholic was a heathen who should die, was brought over here–just ask the Aztecs! The killing in Europe, in fact occurs more that “at least a century;” you seem to overlook the six or seven Crusades. (David Stannard’s book, American Holocaust, goes through this quite well and I highly recommend the book)..So, yes “the Americas” suffered from the “fallout.” Of course, the statement obscurs quite a bit of the horror done to them by “christians.” As to the question, “What do you expect then,” you should be careful here–in fact, this is the same type of apologetics I was referrring to here. One can make the following example: The Germans were humiliated after WWI; this leads to a view that the Jews did it; Hitler comes to power; Jews begin to die in huge numbers. What do you expect then? In fact, there is a model, albeit imperfect: it is the early French trappers and mountain men, who lived with and someimes married Indian women. Was it perfect? Not always. Was it a model? Yes, in much the same way that Europeans all throughout the continent “ran away” from their towns and became Indians–that’s why early (American) colonial laws forbid it!
Do I think the Africans who sold each other were above reproach? No, of course not. However, in Africa, slave trading was normal. It did not last all of one’s lives, nor was in inherited from mother to child (the Spanish also, for the most part, took this position unlike the British). To the Africans, this was just one more normal part of “business”. Were Africans even aware that the people sold were not coming back? Probably not. Would this have stopped all slavetrading? No–if there’s a ship with “magic” weapons, and the sailors also have weapons, and there’s a situation of force implied, howmany would stand up and refuse to trade away their “enemies”? Not many, I suspect. To have a situation where one country (because, remember, until 1588, it was Spain that was the dominant power over here) totally wipes out via force (and disease) another set of cultures, forces them to work in mines for gold which also wipes out the Natives (after all, why bother bringing Africans? Because the Indians were dying off like dogs), enslaves the Africans, destroys cultural/religious systems and replaces them with the poison that is Christianity (with such nonsense as virin births, miracles, talking bushes, seas parting, etc) and then using that faith to keep people dominated (don’t worry, god’ll reward you in heaven) does not show how these peoples “fared better.”
Were there differences between the British and Spanish slave systems? Yup, but that’s like asking:did the Nazis and Cambodians murder their victims differently? Sure, but the point is that they murdered!
RE: RE: RE: Historical View of Slavery
No, these weren’t exceptions. Merchants and craftsmen of mixed races were prevalent in areas of the Spanish Empire as early as the late 16th century.
The expulsion of the Jews? The English expelled the Jews in the 14th Century. The French in the mid-15th Century. The Spanish at the end of the 15th Century along with the Muslims who had conquered and occupied the Iberian peninsula for 900 years.
As far as the Spanish decimating the indigenous population: Explain why there are so many Latinos here and in Latin America who are indigenous-looking or mixed with indigenous blood. Everywhere you turn. You will find them. In fact, the typical profile of a Latino is the Spanish/Indian mixture. Everywhere you turn in Latin America or in most parts of Latin America you will find the indigenous presence in the bloodlines of the people. If I look at the United States I do not find this at all. I am, in fact, hard-pressed as Kevin Costner was when he was casting for his film, to find indigenous-looking people. If the U.S./English were so great with the indigenous people then why don’t I see them around me? Where did they magically disappear to?
Further, the basis for international human rights law comes from the Spanish in connection with the indigenous people.
As far as Spanish raping, so did the English, the French and the Dutch although the rap sticks to the Spanish which is absurdly biased. The fact is that the oldest European institutions in the Americas were founded by the Spanish. The earliest architecture, municipalities, churces and universities. I don’t think their legacy is totally reducible to rape and pillage and genocide. I don’t feel my heritage is perhaps yours is.
I bet you liked Amistad which is the most recent anti-Latino film that Hollywood has produced–besides being historically inaccurate.
I also disagree with your characterization of Christianity as a poison. What do you believe in? Like many religions, the aspect of dogma takes ugly forms. But I don’t think the Enlightenment really brought an end to carnage with its movement towards agnosticism and atheism, neither did communism relieve the world of genocide. In fact, it’s going on as we speak. The U.S. directly participated in two major genocidal events in the 20th Century–Hiroshima and Vietnam. Where was the public outcry then?
Ultimately, my point is that my heritage, my background is undeniably linked to the Spanish, the French, the Indian, the African, the Asian and I am quite clear that there have been very deeply disturbing and painful issues surrounding my history and my family. And I embrace all of it as a reflection of my total humanity. My present and future definition of myself is based heavily on how I reconcile these issues. I will not embrace another heritage that I know to have been equally brutal (although most texts do not reflect this) at the expense of my culture, my history and my people.
RE: RE: I am in complete agreement
thank you kiwi smit for such an eloquent summation to my posting. I could not have said better myself. I do hope others read your response!
Vieques and U.S. Racist and Colonial Policy
Dear Compatriots and Friends,
I believe that a racist policy reigns in the minds of many U.S. Congressmen who affirm that Vieques is unique and that thus the U.S. Navy should never stop its use of Vieques as a firing range. Is the uniqueness of Vieques its 9,500 Puerto Ricans who are not U.S. anglo-whites and who don’t live in a free nation? Is this why they can bombard our island but not bomb in their national territory? What do you think? Regards, Hans Perl-Matanzo
RE: RE: RE: RE: Historical View of Slavery
It should be noted that this is my second reply–the first just disappeared, or I did something wrong (damn!).
Let me try and reply to all the points made. It should be noted how you’ve made a few ad hominem attacks–from “some” or “a little” research to the latest about “my heritage” versus “yours,” to betting I liked Amistad. If you’d actually bet, you would have lost–not only was Amistad an insult to Afro-Americans, it made the whites the heroes and conveniently forgot about how then vice-President Adams looked the other way when a similar incident occured (he had bigger things on his mind, the Presidency). Amistad was not anti-Latino, in my view, for it showed the Spanish slave traders for what they were–traffickers in humans (so much for the Chtn view of brotherhood, eh?).
On to other issues. According to you, merchants/craftsmen, etc were “prevalent.” Of course, prevalent is not defined–1 out of every 10 men? 2 out of 10? How “prevalent” is prevalent, anyway? Even if they were prevalent, so what? It’s easier to throw crumbs to peons after you’ve kicked them out of the table–in fact, it probably shows how Chtn one is! Even conceding the point on prevalence, one can make the same argument about blacks in this country–in fact, the first jockeys in the Kentucky Derby were all black slaves (and some free). This country has also had a “prevalent” class of barbers, ministers, craftsmen, etc. who were black–so what? So slavery wasn’t that bad? One has nothing to do with the other.
As to Spanish architecture–again, so what? There were major architectural structures in this part of the world when the Spanish were trying to survive in Muslim Spain. Of course, you seem to ignore that these structures were not only built on the corpses of Natives, they were built on stolen land. Not only that, they also destroyed many architectural marvels–and in the case of the Aztecs, most of the codicies that contained what one must presume to be valuable information (mathematics, plant knowledge, etc). The same holds true for other European nations.
The reason why the “Black Legend” arose is (a) because the Spanish were the empire at the time and went first and (b) because it was TRUE! How many accounts from Spanish hands do we have to read before we acknowledge that fact?
The Spanish influence in the Western Hemisphere were disastrous–as was the British, Dutch, etc. As to Costner being “hard pressed” to find Indians, I’ve got to conclude that’s probably false. I guess he’d never heard of a reservation–perhaps if he’d come to Colorado, where I reside, he would’ve had better luck. The point is, however, that no Euro, Afro or Native American whose family has been in this country, can claim “racial” purity–there are indigenous peoples all throughout the country–it’s just that racist as our country is, it’s not until recent times that one could be proud of that fact.
What do I believ in? Me. You. Children. Family. Friends. People who fall in love with us. I don’t need a deity with rules. And when I look at the Book of Lies (I mean, the Bible) with it’s stories about the sun standing still, or walkin’/talkin’ snakes in some garden, or talking bushes or water to wine or coming back from the dead, I take it about as seriously as Greek or Aztec stories–just stories that are based on fear, ignorance & superstition. What the Enlightenment actually did was not to “end…carnage” as if that’s what it claimed to do, but it reduced god from an everyday explanation to a nonexplanation (good riddance!!). It said that if humans are allowed to think freely, they can (and have) solve how the world works–just human with effort and full of mistakes. That is the legacy of the Enlightenment.
Chty has been a plague on the earth, as well as Islam. Millions have died, and your example of the Jews is instructive, though incomplete. In fact, since the time Chty was legalized in the 300’s, Jews have been ghettoized, discriminated against and hunted down like dogs–all this to “god’s chosen” by Chtns (and Muslims, though not as much). When you can point to the famous atheist-agnostic war, then perhaps we’ll be even (not quite). As to the communism remark, the fact that the old Soviet Union called itself communist, is irrelevant. Nowhere do you find in Marx’s writings any apporval for their genocidal impact (and no, I’m not a Marxist)
Finally, the historical record shows that the US has been participating in foreign genocides since 1898-1900 in the Philippines; what do you think Mr. Reagan (who I hope has a long lingering illness and painful death-more than his victims ever got) was doing in Central Ameica during the 1980s? That was also genocide.
RE: Vieques and U.S. Racist and Colonial Policy
To answer all of your questions, Yes. As a reigning superpower, do you honestly thinks the US political/military elite even gives a shit? Why? They haven’t since 1898, right?
Racist policy against Puerto Rico
Dear Víctor,
I believe that the President of the Unites State is responsible of the U.S. Armed Forces occupation of Puerto Rico and Vieques. One of the reasons behind their use of Vieques as a target practice site is because the U.S. Presidents do not care about the negative effects it has on our population. Their irresponsible and colonial attitude is supported by their racism. As a colony with close to four millian inhabitants who are hispanic and mostly non-anglo, Puerto Rico has become a testing ground for military experiments which they would rather not perform in their homeland. It is our responsibility to struggle against this racist and abusive policy. It is time for us to govern ourselves. We need to become an independent nation so we can ensure that the U.S. Government does not continue to abuse us. Que Viva Puerto Rico Libre, Hans Perl-Matanzo
RE: Peace
Peace.
RE: Racist policy against Puerto Rico
Why are Puerto Ricans complaining? They are US citizens. Why aren’t the Peurto Ricans complaining to their government that wants to keep the US Navy. Do you think that many Peurto Ricans want to give up the comforts of their situation?
You want the US of your island, but alot of you still want the comforts of home.
The US goverment tests alot of sits on American soil. It is the trade offs that alot of Peurto Ricans want to keep, but only on their terms.
RE: RE: Racism in New York Puerto Ricans
As an african american, I agree that latinos ( whatever the race) are culturally different from americans.
What I find amusing is that
1) latinos say that there isn’t any racism
2) all races in latino culture are celebrated
3) african americans are slow stupid etc
4) that african americans are trying to divide themselves when they don’t help latinos
5) african americans are racist just because they don’t support any latino causes.
6) latinos hate the word latino and hispanic but do not want to be classified as white, black, mixed etc.
7) latinos of all races have contempt for a group of people who fought long and hard for everything.
Some african americans that I have talked to feel that latinos are arrogant, unwilling to comprise, don’t know anything about rules and regulations, violent, only care about themselves, and don’t know how to get along with people that don’t speak their language.
Don’t worry I am not interested in latino culture or in a latino man. I just came across this site and was curious.
Where I live there are not many latinos. It is good, because in my city african americans are in a battle with white americans over power, education, money.
It is not like Miami, Florida; New York City, Los Angelos, or Houston,Texas wwhere the Cubans or other latino groups give a hoot about the african americans there.
It is all about power. Race is power.
latinos are not a race but different nationalit
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Historical View of Slavery
The largest slave traders in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, when “Amistad” takes place, are the British. The Spanish were far from being major slave traders, that dubious distinction fell upon the Portuguese and Dutch. By papal decree in the early 16th Century, Spain and Portugal divided the world for conquest. Africa was a Portuguese area so that their slave trading industry flourished along with that of the Dutch who disregarded the pope’s decree. And there are other historical inaccuracies and discrepancies as you point out. I agree with you that many African-Americans were offended that a “white man” again had to save them. This is a typical Hollywood ploy. But I also agree with Mr. Smit that the film is directly anti-Spanish and anti-Hispanic on many different levels that harken back to the old Hollywood depictions of the Spanish–and by default Latinos. I don’t recall the name of the English historian who is actually an expert on slavery and had actually published a voluminous study on slavery when “Amistad” was released, but in his article, which appeared in the New York Times OpEd Page, he stated that the film was completely inaccurate and misrepresented the British role in the slave trade.
RE: RE: Racist policy against Puerto Rico
Not to come across as to harsh, but it seems to me you don’t quite know what you’re talking about. The people of Vieques have always been opposedto the Naval presence. In fact, the US government promised to return the island after WWII was over, but decided after the war, that the island was valuable because it would protect the sea lanes and provide training for soldiers. The Puerto Rican government (the current one) actually wants the islands back and returned to as pristine a condition as possible.
As to PR’s being US citizens: they are and they aren’t. I mean, they don’t pay federal taxes and can’t vote for President, but they are US citizens by birth. Actually, it’s a wierd situation to be in, not seen in virtually no part of the world. Besides, if as you claim we are US citizens, then why can’t we complain?
Your last point was that the US government has experimented/tested on US soil. Don’t the people of Utah and Nevada complain? You betch. Why? Because there’s been a pattern of US government experimentation of its citizens, especially post WWII–see the recent excellent book, The Plutonium Files.
Actually, themore I reread your post, the more insulting it becomes. “Comforts of home?” Gimme a break.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Historical View of Slavery
It might have been Hugh Thomas’ book, The Slave Trade. I may have to go back and see Amistad again to pick up the anti-Spanish bias, since the first time, I was so agitated at the whole film, it might have missed the bias. Personally, I don’t think it’s too big a deal, in the sense that Hollywood never gets the history right. As to thebias, that is a longstanding complaint–look at the TV boycott by minorities as a whole. Again, my impression was not that the film had many examples of anti-Spanish bias, but that once again, helpless Africans had to be saved by (Christian) males. The irony of Christians owning slaves, is of course, not too major a point. 🙂
On an unrelated point, though Mr. Smit and I disagree, I found the email exchanges to be enlightening. Muchas gracias, caballero.
Hans Perl-Matanzo is an Independentista
The only you support the idea of the U.S. getting out of Vieques is that you are a damn INDEPENDENTISTA, a person who wants to separate us from the greatest nation in the history of the world, and I won’t let you do that. Hans, you do not understand that without the United States and their money we would be starving to death and cutting sugar cane. We need the United States, even if they bomb us, we have to accept it because we live from them. Basically, we are their bitch, and we have to do what they tell us we have to do, but that is much better than independence! I love the American Flag and what it has done for me, it has given me a country to be proud of, with history and proud people that are willing to fight and die for it. I won’t let you make Puerto Rico into a Republic because then we would become communist and we would have to leave to Miami. Statehood Forever!!!
RE: Vieques and U.S. Racist and Colonial Policy
Something to think about……….
Is it a racist policy that causes all
the harm and pain in whatever country
it may be that is hurt by war,blight,
hunger or harm? Or is it a matter of greed and egos that perpetrate harm
on the weaker powers?
Boricuas and Race
I was unable to access replies posted to the comments on Puertorican race relations… so I am afraid that what I’m about to write may be redundant. Nonetheless, here I go…
I am angry. It seems that la mentalidad anglosajona has really gotten to you guys. Except for the postings entitled “Racism and New York Puerto Ricans” and “Diverse and I like it like that”, the other postings seem to be dominated by the North American concepts of “race.”
Firstly, when you talk about race within the Latin American context, the definition of “race” is very different from the black/while dualistic mentality of mainstream United States culture because of our unique inter and intra racial history. Puerto Ricans, in particular, have race classifications that vary from family to family and from pueblo to pueblo – a person can be “jabao”” or “cano,” “achinao,” or “angolo.” A “jabao,” for example, is a blond haired, white-skinned Puerto Rican who has African features. Someone who is “blanquito” for Puerto Ricans may be a “black” for an American Anglo. Because of this, a Puerto Rican from the island and one from the U.S. may have very different ideas about what “race” means. Thus, we must be VERY careful about what our frame of reference is when we talk about Puerto Ricans and race.
Secondly, Puerto Rico is a “white” island in comparison to the rest of the carribean islands, not so much because of Spanish slave policy, but because historically there was enough cheap European and creole
labor to go around so that by the late nineteenth century African slave labor was not as “necessary” as it was on other islands. (Check out some history books).
Having said that, let me go on about my own personal experience as a blanquita Boricua, growing up in Newark, New Jersey (a predominantly African American city, with a large Puerto Rican minority). I will start by saying that I have NEVER felt priviledged or have received preferential treatment because my skin is white. I had to fight tooth and nail to prove I was just as “black” as my African-American sisters and just as deserving as my Anglo-American sisters. Having to expend so much energy to define and empower myself is, of course, a by-product of growing up in this sick racist US culture. I do not know if I would have had such a clear sense of identity and of self it I had grown up in Puerto Rico. So, I count my “racial tribulations” as a blessing.
In fact, as a teenager I was not happy that I was so white, because it seemed all the guys preferred darker complexions…as I did. As a college student, I was made to feel guilty about my European heritage, until I learned that my family, as well as many other Puerto Rican jibaro families, had never owned slaves, but instead came from a long line of agricultural laborers who worked long and hard hours to make a meager living. In fact, many of these families were the ones who were compelled to migrate to the United States in search of El Sueno Americano.
The only vestiges of racisim I can recall, is perhaps my family’s concern that I marry outside my culture. It had very little to do with race and more with my family’s fear that an African-American, Anglo-American or a South-American, may not appreciate my Puerto Ricaness or may have preconceived prejudices about who I was (for example, that idea that all Puertorican women are “hot”). Marrying a “black” Puertorican was not a problem. A Puertorican was a “Puertorican” no matter what color his skin was. For a long time, I shied away from dating outside my culture for fear I would be the “flavor of the month.”
From my visits to the island, I have observed that race has less to do with relationships among Puertoricans than class. In Puerto Rico, class standing and political connections seemed a much more significant barometer of diferential treatment than race.
To a lesser degree, this is also true in the US… but it’s not exciting enough for the media to report on. Culture and class create diferential treatment among Anglos and among peoples of African ancestory. Jamaicans dont like African-Americans, and African-Americans dont like Haitians. Blue-blood WASPs are not too crazy about Italian-Americans and middle class “white-folks” are not crazy about “white trash.”
I know I may have confused some of you because I have skipped from topic to topic and made many generalizations. My excuse is that in order to develop all the issues encompased within a question like, “What are race relations like among Puerto Ricans on the island and the US?”, I would need to write a book!
My main point is that such a topic cannot be approached with a cavalier attitude. There are many variables we must consider. Otherwise, we would run the risk of misrepresenting the truth. I am not saying that what others have posted is not true, or that their experiences are not valid… just that it is not the complete story.
Paz y Solaridad,
Cotorrita
RE: Boricuas and Race
The “complete story” should probably start out with the fact that there is no such thing as race, anyway. It’s like looking at a rose, a carnation and an orchid and saying, “The race of carnations is better than the race of roses.” If anyone said that (and meant it) wouldn’t we think they were insane? Yet, when people talk about “black” v. “white,” it’s taken seriously. Why? Because unlike roses or carnations, humans have the power to separate others. In fact, from a biological point of view, if you are “white,” it means you suffer from a melanin deficiency–it actually comes as quite a revelation to most people.
In fact, it occursto me that the whole discussion is misplaced–if we grant the nonexistence of any race but the human one, then basically we’re fighting over which skin color is the best; “the sound of fury, signifying nothing.”
I don’t think any of the replies implied theirs was the only truth, and I don’t think any of us were misrepresenting the “truth”. We just don’t always agree on everything. To which I say, thank god!
PS–If you write your book, all of us will get a free copy, right? 🙂
RE: RE: Vieques and U.S. Racist and Colonial Policy
Why the dichotomy? Could it be alot of factors, with some more important (or assumed) than others?It seems to me that racism is not only a policy, but a justification for that policy. “Why do we discriminate against Afro-Americans? Because they’re black. So? That means they’re inferior to us. Then let’s enslave them and brutalize their women.”
RE: Hans Perl-Matanzo is an Independentista
I will not speak for Mr. Matanzo–he can (and I’m sure will) speak for himself. I gotta say, though, that the tone of your reply is unnecessarily harsh. If the man is a “damn independentista,” so what? Can PR’s not agree on this point without being attacked? Why “damn,” not just an independentista? Well, he’ll respond on his own.
The US “the greatest nation in the history of the world?” In a word, bullshit. There is no difference in the actions of the US, British or Roman Empires, except in the level of cruelty inflicted on the world. The US slaughtered its indigeneous population, enslaved Africans, stole land from Mexicans and subjugated women. Guess we disagree on the word “great.” The US also experimented on its peoples since WWII, and has managed to maintain a system where political and economic elites (who, in a pure coincidence, I’m sure) have happened to by Anglo males.
The fact that people are willing to die for a piece of cloth called the flag is to me a pretty disgusting notion. War is the slaughter of the innocent, based on lies and organized by national leaders–and the armies are composed of overwhelming numbers of the poor. Yeah, it makes my heart go pitter patter every time I see the Stars and Stripes.
PR “becoming Communist?” First, there never was a Communist country in the world–all one has to do is sit down and read anything by Karl Marx and see if after doing so, one can honestly say that the Soviet Union (or Cuba, for that matter) was and is Communist. No–they are/were totalitarian dictatorships, nothing more, nothing less. Besides, what’s wrong with Miami? 🙂
RE: Racist policy against Puerto Rico
I totally agree–there’s a great book which traces all (including Clinton) of the Presidents’ racist views. It’s called, Nixon’s Piano.
In all fairness, the US Government has been testing on its citizens, especially since WWII, mostly nuclear “stuff”. I honestly don’t expect anything different for a brown-skinned, Spanish-speaking country.
RE: Racist policy against Puerto Rico
Sir,I am Puerto Rican and proud of it, but I hope that Puerto Rico never becomes an independent nation. I think that should take a trip into Latin America and experience the hardships that these people are going through. you need to explore the problems that all of these independent countries are having and have had for years. Let me tell you that a lot of these countries have vast amounts of natural resources, we cannot say the same about Puerto Rico. I am glad of the fact that the independence movement is very small and I hope and pray that it keeps getting smaller.
Atentamente
A concern Boricua
RE: Boricuas and Race
Right on, sister!
RE: Hans Perl-Matanzo is an Independentista
I think you’re in the wrong discussion board. This one’s on race relations. Be that as it may. Puerto Rico may have undergone a great amount of development that integrated her economy to the U.S. and allowed the Americans to create an exclusive subsidized market for their products–which, by the way, is at present more a hindrance than an aid. As such, the development of the infrastructure that Munoz Marin hoped for was somewhat achieved. The question is what is the next step for Puerto Rico? Every nation, whether previously a colony or not must ask itself this question when an impasse or a stagnant condition exists (which is the case in Puerto Rico). The American colonies asked this when it braved independence. The French asked this when they defied their aristocracy. South Africa asked this when the U.S. applied economic pressures to bring the apartheid regime down. I do not believe the independentistas hate the Americans or wish them harm unless they want to harm Puerto Rico. (And its starting to look more and more that way as more information is released on Vieques) It is more a matter of confronting our own reality as a separate people with a distinct culture and history that is different from the Anglo-American past. Sure there’s some commonality, but the reality is that we are Latin Americans. This is undeniable. And even more specifically, we are Caribeños with a very rich language, culture and history. Thank God for this website. Live and learn my friend. You sound like you have a very big complejo about being Puerto Rican and that you devalue who you are. Worst of all, you devalue your family and a people of whom you obviously know very little. We have many fine writers, artists, scholars, statesmen, musicians and scientists. In fact, it’s amazing how many there are, considering our size! Just look at the brains in these discussion boards. I exhort you to try to learn more about who we are.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Historical View of Slavery
Brazil has the highest percentage of black slaves. The highest percentage of black people outside of Nigeria.
Most of the slaves sent to the US died on the way over there. Most of the slaves were sent to the Caribbean, South America, and Central America.