Latinos Attack PBS for WWII Series

There are 13 comments on the Jan 27, 2013, Time story titled Latinos Attack PBS for WWII Series. In it, Time reports that:

A group of Latino American soldiers pose for a group portrait after landing on Cebu Island, Philippines, near the end of World War II.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Time.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#45 Jan 29, 2013
^^^typo-- Comanches
Barros Serrano-Bey

Reserve, NM

#47 Jan 29, 2013
Linc wrote:
<quoted text>
STOLE!?
YOUR VERY OWN MEXICAN GENERAL, GENERAL SANTA ANNA SOLD THE LANDS TO AMERICANS DON'T YOU REMEMBER? ARIZONA TERRITORY, ALTA-CALIFORNIA, COLORADO, NEBRASKA ALL SOLD, NOT STOLEN, IF WE'D WANTED TO STEAL SOMETHING WE WOULDN'T HAVE RETURNED ALL THE LAND GAINED DURING THE MEXICAN WAR.
IF WE'RE SO RACIST, AND THINK MEXICO IS BETTER THEN GO AHEAD CROSS THE BORDER AND NEVER COME BACK. JuST DON'T YOU THINK WE DON'T KNOW THAT MEXICANS ARE JUST AS DISCRIMINATING AS 'THE GRINGOS', I KNOW WHITE IN MEXICO IS CONSIDERED SUPERIOR THAN THE BROWN. I EVEN HEARD THEY CAN BUY LAWS THERE, IT SOUNDS SO GOOD IF IT WEREN'T FOR YOUR DRUG WAR I'D HAVE MIGRATED THERE.
EVEN HERE, ALL KINDS OF HISPANICS DON'T GET ALONG, CUBANS THINK THEY'RE BETTER THAN DOMINICANS BECAUSE THEY'RE 'WHITER', PUERTO RICANS THINK THEY'RE AMERICANS. DON'T YOU SAY YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT IM TALKING ABOUT CABRON! I'VE HAD MY FAIR SHARE OF HISPANICS BEFORE AND THEY'RE NO LESS 'RACIST' THAN US
Don't waste my time with your historical revisionist gringo re-write of USA expansionism westward.

What I spoke of is true history. You can find plenty of bigoted Mexicans or latinos out there, sure, plenty of bigoted blacks too, so what? That doesn't negate history.

The fact is, the USA stole the land, behaved like an imperialist bastard, treated people like crap, and so the least that can happen now is some respect for all the peoples once so abused.

That's too much for some of you bigots.

In reality both the USA and Mexico are severely screwed up, I don't think a rational person would disagree with that. The 2 are intimately related, OBVIOUSLY and so the country with more power, that would be the USA, obviously is responsible for the way things are going.

Example: USA War on Drugs enables appearance and growth of Mexican drug cartels (as happened earlier in Columbia).

Other example: USA corporations controlling the Mexican economy create the situation which impels Mexicans to cross illegally for work.

And so on. And both countries' governments as I see them now are shovelling crap on more crap, I mean they're both corrupt and irresponsible. So how do we solve that? Not by hating Mexico.
Barros Serrano-Bey

Reserve, NM

#48 Jan 29, 2013
sONE wrote:
<quoted text>
In the book about Chambers County Texas history where some of my ancestors were during that time- my great something Aunt married some kind of Hispanic/Latino guy named Silva and he had a huge ranch and was very well off financially. He was known as a fierce fighter in wars against the "Indians". The name was pretty prominent in that county- which is in south Texas near Galveston. I don't know how he looked. I know most of those Silva descendats look White at this point. Most people in my family who didn't live in the south part of Texas were not even around "Hispanics and Latinos" because they weren't even in other parts of Texas to any extent. No, they didn't "run them off" or kill them-- they were just not in most of Texas- never would come and settle here.
It is the same in NM that there were very Spanish (by ancestry) people who had ranches. In NM many lost their land to to gringo manipulations in court, in violation of the Treaty, bogus though it was.

Mexicans generally in the SW were not run into Mexico, correct. But they were in 3rd class status in most places. Don't pretend Texas was some sort of paradise of inter-ethnic harmony. The brutality and racism of the Texas Rangers is well documented.

This is not especially an issue now in that there is legal equality and so on. But it is important to see in the context of all these debates about immigration. The long history of abuse has not ended when we're speaking of undocumented workers. For the people around me, nearly all born here and many in NM for generations, it is not such a problem. There are hardly any illegal people around here. Not like California.

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#49 Jan 29, 2013
Barros Serrano-Bey wrote:
<quoted text>
It is the same in NM that there were very Spanish (by ancestry) people who had ranches. In NM many lost their land to to gringo manipulations in court, in violation of the Treaty, bogus though it was.
Mexicans generally in the SW were not run into Mexico, correct. But they were in 3rd class status in most places. Don't pretend Texas was some sort of paradise of inter-ethnic harmony. The brutality and racism of the Texas Rangers is well documented.
This is not especially an issue now in that there is legal equality and so on. But it is important to see in the context of all these debates about immigration. The long history of abuse has not ended when we're speaking of undocumented workers. For the people around me, nearly all born here and many in NM for generations, it is not such a problem. There are hardly any illegal people around here. Not like California.
I had people who lost land through legal manipulation in court.

Even though most all of the small amount of Spanish speaking people were in about four states- Mexicans in Texas DID have buinesses, farms, worked alongside Whites for the same wages in many capacities (not undercut wages in droves like they do now and assist in ruining many formerly good paying occupations- now having things known as "Mexican jobs" and day labor pavillion things that was unheard of 20 years ago.

Yes, I know the government has initiated it and pretty much erased the border to devastate wages for US workers for the few jobs left here- in addition to massive legal immigration as well. Next step is Chinese wages. One step at a time.

Back to the above article-- it is dumb to have to specifically sift through records to find possibly "appropriate" names to use in a PBS special for a fraction of one percent who participated in WW2 along with millions of others.

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#50 Jan 29, 2013
^^^Cesar Cavez knew they wanted to get away with it as much as they could in his time too- and he fought to protect his US workers and legal status workers.

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#51 Jan 29, 2013
^^^Now we don't have people like Cesar Chavez anymore and that is the problem.
Barros Serrano-Bey

Reserve, NM

#52 Jan 29, 2013
sONE wrote:
<quoted text>
I had people who lost land through legal manipulation in court.
Even though most all of the small amount of Spanish speaking people were in about four states- Mexicans in Texas DID have buinesses, farms, worked alongside Whites for the same wages in many capacities (not undercut wages in droves like they do now and assist in ruining many formerly good paying occupations- now having things known as "Mexican jobs" and day labor pavillion things that was unheard of 20 years ago.
Yes, I know the government has initiated it and pretty much erased the border to devastate wages for US workers for the few jobs left here- in addition to massive legal immigration as well. Next step is Chinese wages. One step at a time.
Back to the above article-- it is dumb to have to specifically sift through records to find possibly "appropriate" names to use in a PBS special for a fraction of one percent who participated in WW2 along with millions of others.
Also you need to consider the historical context of the media. There has been little portrayal of anything Mexican. When a Mexican is in the films or TV, he is played by a Puerto Rican or Spaniard. Jimmy Smits, Antonio Banderas. And so given this, it is reasonable to hear demands of "Hollywood" that attention be paid and especially in historical programming.

Always there is some excuse for pushing this under the rug. Your estimate of their % participation in WW2. Someone else who claims, oh they're just Spanish conquistadores anyway, they conquered it themselves, or simply the widespread notion, still common, that they are the "other", outside of the consideration of mainstream USA media and culture.

But, no, the designs of the gringo imperialists are not to be realized, for the people by conquest included in the USA did not disappear culturally, did not diminish. And the border being artificial and relations intimate between the 2 countries, who would be surprised that movement continues across it, as it has for millenia.

Will gringos even bother to watch what goes on in Mexico with the return of the PRI to Presidential power, will anyone consider USA policy in relation to anything but illegal immigration, regarding Mexico? Is any gringo prepared to address the participation of USA corporations in the Mexican economy, politics and its corruption?

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#53 Jan 29, 2013
Barros Serrano-Bey wrote:
<quoted text>
Also you need to consider the historical context of the media. There has been little portrayal of anything Mexican. When a Mexican is in the films or TV, he is played by a Puerto Rican or Spaniard. Jimmy Smits, Antonio Banderas. And so given this, it is reasonable to hear demands of "Hollywood" that attention be paid and especially in historical programming.
Always there is some excuse for pushing this under the rug. Your estimate of their % participation in WW2. Someone else who claims, oh they're just Spanish conquistadores anyway, they conquered it themselves, or simply the widespread notion, still common, that they are the "other", outside of the consideration of mainstream USA media and culture.
But, no, the designs of the gringo imperialists are not to be realized, for the people by conquest included in the USA did not disappear culturally, did not diminish. And the border being artificial and relations intimate between the 2 countries, who would be surprised that movement continues across it, as it has for millenia.
Will gringos even bother to watch what goes on in Mexico with the return of the PRI to Presidential power, will anyone consider USA policy in relation to anything but illegal immigration, regarding Mexico? Is any gringo prepared to address the participation of USA corporations in the Mexican economy, politics and its corruption?
There were NO borders across the entire continent as we know them. They were all put into place by some kind of Europeans. Mexico's is no more "illegitimate" than the rest of the borders- if you want to look at them as being illegitimate. I also know- at the time my ancestors came to Texas- the Spanish speaking people were considered just as much an enemy to the Texas Natives as the "gringos" as you call them. They were not coming back and forth across the border. That's one reason they could never get any significant settlement of Spanish speaking Mexican people in Texas.

At one point, for a short time, the leadership of Mexico (Spaniards by blood) broke away from Spain and called what is now part of the US- Mexican territory, the same way Spain had called it Spanish territory. It is still ruled by people of Spanish descent. They are in cahoots with some wealthy Americans and globalists- the regular US people are harmed by this as I have said a billion times- we do not get kickbacks. Our ancestors fought against sweatshops and for better lives for their people. We have had our struggles too and did it alone for the most part.

As I said Cesar Chavez spoke of the fact that there was an intentional move to be lax about border control to flood in illegal immigrants and crash wages for Americans and legal workers. He said it had been going on for decades at the time he was speaking of it. He protected his US workers regardless. His kind does not seem to exist anymore.
Martin_Nuke

Cainta, Philippines

#54 Jan 29, 2013
Spanish Empire or New Spain was so extensive it even covered half of the United States.

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#55 Jan 29, 2013
Chavez himself was a third generation American citizen and a Navy veteran. Although he has become over time virtually the patron saint of the Reconquista movement to reclaim all of the southwest for Mexico, in his prime he was an ardent opponent of illegal immigration and actively fought against the importation of strikebreakers from Mexico.

Chavez understood the basic laws of supply and demand the greater the supply (of labor), the less the demand (and hence the lower the wages). Just as the founder of the American Federation of Labor Samuel Gompers was an influential voice calling for the immigration-restricting law of 1924, so Chavez openly and actively opposed illegal immigration because it crippled his ability to unionize farm workers and increase their wages.

In 1979 testimony to Congress, Chavez complained, "... when the farm workers strike and their strike is successful, the employers go to Mexico and have unlimited, unrestricted use of illegal alien strikebreakers to break the strike. And, for over 30 years, the Immigration and Naturalization Service has looked the other way and assisted in the strikebreaking. I do not remember one single instance in 30 years where the Immigration service has removed strikebreakers.... The employers use professional smugglers to recruit and transport human contraband across the Mexican border for the specific act of strikebreaking..."

In 1969, Chavez actually led a march to the Mexican border to protest illegal immigration, accompanied by Sen. Walter Mondale and Ralph Abernathy, whom alert readers will recognize as Martin Luther King's successor as head of the Southern Leadership Conference.

Chavez demanded that the federal government close the border, routinely reported suspected illegal immigrants to immigration officials, and put his brother in charge of Minutemen-like border patrols which on more than one occasion resulted in the beatings of intruders.

The collapse of the Mexican economy in 1982 sent a flood of illegal immigrants north of the border, driving down wages, and making border enforcement politically problematic.

While cheap labor does reduce the cost of, say, strawberries, it does so only minimally. This economist noted that perhaps 7 percent of the price paid by shoppers for strawberries actually goes to pickers. Meanwhile, citizen taxpayers are forced to pick up the tab for workers' medical care and social services and their children's schooling. The National Academy of Sciences estimated in 1997 that an immigrant without a high-school degree ultimately costs America $100,000 more than he contributes.

Yet the Latin-American electorate remains ambivalent about illegal immigration. According to a 2002 survey by the Pew Hispanic Center, 48 percent of registered Latino voters felt that there were "too many" immigrants in the U.S. while only 7 percent thought there were "too few."

This makes sense, of course, since the nation's Hispanics often suffer the consequences of illegal immigration most directly in terms of lower wages, dysfunctional schools, and pressure from relatives to assist them in sneaking into the U.S.

Illegal immigration is a benefit to Mexico in ways other than money sent home by workers in the U.S., the second largest source of income in the Mexican economy behind oil. As a former Mexican Foreign Minister admitted, an insecure border allows Mexico's most white ruling class to, in Sailer's words, "bleed off" the discontented poor rather than make the kind of fundamental reforms necessary to make the Mexican economy vibrant and healthy.

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#56 Jan 29, 2013
Martin_Nuke wrote:
Spanish Empire or New Spain was so extensive it even covered half of the United States.
Alabama, Mississippi, Florida, etc.
Linc

Salt Lake City, UT

#57 Jan 29, 2013
Barros Serrano-Bey wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't waste my time with your historical revisionist gringo re-write of USA expansionism westward.
What I spoke of is true history. You can find plenty of bigoted Mexicans or latinos out there, sure, plenty of bigoted blacks too, so what? That doesn't negate history.
The fact is, the USA stole the land, behaved like an imperialist bastard, treated people like crap, and so the least that can happen now is some respect for all the peoples once so abused.
That's too much for some of you bigots.
In reality both the USA and Mexico are severely screwed up, I don't think a rational person would disagree with that. The 2 are intimately related, OBVIOUSLY and so the country with more power, that would be the USA, obviously is responsible for the way things are going.
Example: USA War on Drugs enables appearance and growth of Mexican drug cartels (as happened earlier in Columbia).
Other example: USA corporations controlling the Mexican economy create the situation which impels Mexicans to cross illegally for work.
And so on. And both countries' governments as I see them now are shovelling crap on more crap, I mean they're both corrupt and irresponsible. So how do we solve that? Not by hating Mexico.
Mexico is a shithole nation no doubt about that, there's no not hating them. Canada way back then was also a major US drug supplier but they tidied up but not Mexico

My question is how did the USA gain more power than Mexico?

Mexico had larger lands, California had golden and the Mexicans, what did they do aside from spreading their religion to the Native Americans building missions and having civil war.

You must agree that at some point US and Mexico were at par with each other. But then US started to gain more power, as you said it so what went wrong? And what went wrong with all Spain colony? It's all third world countries now

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#58 Jan 29, 2013
Linc wrote:
<quoted text>
Mexico is a shithole nation no doubt about that, there's no not hating them. Canada way back then was also a major US drug supplier but they tidied up but not Mexico
My question is how did the USA gain more power than Mexico?
Mexico had larger lands, California had golden and the Mexicans, what did they do aside from spreading their religion to the Native Americans building missions and having civil war.
You must agree that at some point US and Mexico were at par with each other. But then US started to gain more power, as you said it so what went wrong? And what went wrong with all Spain colony? It's all third world countries now
To me that's as not as mysterious as why you as an adult can't punctuate English at a third-grade level.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Emmy Awards Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News African-American Women in Santa Barbara County ... 7 hr SadButTrue 3
News "Duck Dynasty" family debuts musical in Las Vegas Apr 18 Sterkfontein Swar... 1
News Sources: KTVK drops 'Good Morning Arizona' pers... (Mar '09) Apr 17 Special Dark 786
News 'Dr. Oz' to spread story about effort to raise ... Apr 16 HELL ON EARTH 2
News 5 things you need to know this weekend Apr 12 Elise Gingerich 1
News KOB-TV Announces New Chief Meteorologist (Dec '08) Apr 9 Herman 107
News Elliott Davis (Oct '09) Apr 6 Gail edwards 29
More from around the web