UNITED STATES: LET HISPANICS LIVE IN PEACE

By - - and IPS Correspondents Reprint | | Print |

This column is available for visitors to the IPS website only for reading. Reproduction in print or electronic media is prohibited. Media interested in republishing may contact romacol@ips.org.

MIAMI, Oct 1 2003 (IPS) - It must be election time again. Hispanics are suddenly being rediscovered in the United States, by both US and Spanish politicians, writes Joaquin Roy, \’Jean Monnet\’ professor and Director of the European Union Centre at the University of Miami. Amazingly, the presence of the mythical 40 million \’\’Hispanics\’\’ in the US is being wielded as justification for the Spanish government\’s unconditional backing of US policy in Iraq, the author writes. But did Aznar read the polls showing that Hispanic support for Bush\’s policies in Iraq was 20 points lower than the national average? And why does Spain\’s prime minister hold US Hispanics in much higher esteem than the other 40 million real \’\’Hispanics\’\’ in Spain, who overwhelmingly (90 percent) opposed the Iraq adventure? Applying his own logic, Aznar should side with Castro against the US because of the presence of 10 million \’\’Hispanics\’\’ in Cuba. A humble suggestion. On the occasion of October 12th, the Day of Hispanity, the national day of Spain, or the Italianified Columbus Day in the US, leave Hispanics and Latinos in peace. They will really appreciate it.

It must be election time again. Hispanics are suddenly being rediscovered in the United States. Figures are manipulated, reinvented, inflated, used, and abused with a level of improvisation, audacity, and recklessness that deserves meditation and concern.

As if by some grand alchemy, Puerto Ricans, Argentineans, Salvadorians, Mexicans and even Galicians are being converted into ”Hispanics”, a catch-all label that includes some 40 million residents of the United States, legal, illegal, clandestine, refugees, even ghosts). Many reject the label, preferring to be included in a collective entity of ”Latinos”.

This matter could be most gracefully resolved by simply respecting individual preferences. In short, each to the label of his or her choosing. The term ”Hispanic” should not resound with connotations of neoimperialism or slavery, as some self-appointed cultural leaders claim, demanding to be referred to as ”Latino”.

Hispanic, after all, comes from ”Hispanicus”, the ancient population of Hispania, the Roman name of the Iberian Peninsula. Let any Latino who does not trace his or her ancestry back to Spainor Portugal please throw the first stone.

Ironically, it was Chilean and Colombian intellectuals who in the mid-nineteenth century coined the expression ”Latin America” as a way to counterbalance the legacy of Spain. This appellation was picked up by France and her policy of insertion into Mexico that lead to the disaster of Maximilian. The United States then joined the trend, adopting usage of the term ”Latin America” and to the practice of calling Spanish-Americans ”Latin”.

It might be useful to remind those ”Hispanics” who prefer to be called ”Latinos” that legally-speaking the copyright of this label should belong to the inhabitants of places formerly colonised by the empire that surged from Latium, today Lazio, the area surrounding Rome, populated by the ancient pre-Roman tribes of the original Latins; hence, the Latin language.

In any event, it seems that Hispanics/Latinos have been rediscovered not only in Washington but in Madrid as well. This discovery, as momentous as that of Columbus, is not limited to Spain’s usual deployment of cultural programmes to reach out to Hispanics. Amazingly, the presence of the mythical 40 million ”Hispanics” in the United States is being wielded as justification for the Spanish government’s unconditional backing of US policy in Iraq. This novel logic has been widely aired in a series of declarations by Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar, laid out in a package of articles and interviews in the Wall Street Journal as a preview of his trip to the United States and a conversation with French president Jacques Chirac.

It all culminated in a speech given in Miami. Aznar asked Chirac what he would do if he had forty million French speakers in the United States and more than 300 million in Latin America. According to Aznar, Chirac was left speechless. In reality, he was stupefied. Compared to the fight against international and Basque terror, estranged relations with Morocco, foreign investment, reconstruction contracts in Iraq, guarantees for the devolution of Gibraltar, and a damaged role in the EU, nothing is more important than Hispanics in the United States.

Had Aznar asked Hispanics for their opinion? Did he read the polls showing that Hispanic support for Bush’s policies in Iraq was 20 points lower than the national average? And why does Spain’s prime minister hold US Hispanics in much higher esteem than the other 40 million real ”Hispanics” in Spain, who overwhelmingly (90 percent) opposed the Iraq adventure?

Applying Aznar’s logic, President Fox, who has about 25 million real Mexicans in the United States, would have sided with President Bush. Fox did the opposite. Taking this thinking to absurd extremes, Aznar should then side with Fidel Castro in opposing the United States because of the presence of almost 10 million ”Hispanics” in Cuba.

A humble suggestion. On the occasion of October 12th, the Day of Hispanity, the national day of Spain, or the Italianified Columbus Day in the US, leave Hispanics and Latinos in peace. They will really appreciate it. (END/COPYRIGHT IPS)