Latinos VS. Blacks In Southern Cali Video
- Thread starter CRIMINAL_909
- Start date
First of all, am I supposed to be upset at you calling me a "boy"? LMAO! Slice it all you want son, but if you're using that as a racial slur it doesn't work on me. 
What type of boy am I? Let me get a laugh out of you for another sec..
No need to address me any longer? Well, considering I just blew a Jupitar sized hole in ALL of your claims I wouldn't want to discuss the subject any longer. A christian that wants factual data? Sure! Is it far fetched for a christian to want factual data? BTW, I'm not a christian and thanks for using more fallacies!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What type of boy am I? Let me get a laugh out of you for another sec..No need to address me any longer? Well, considering I just blew a Jupitar sized hole in ALL of your claims I wouldn't want to discuss the subject any longer. A christian that wants factual data? Sure! Is it far fetched for a christian to want factual data? BTW, I'm not a christian and thanks for using more fallacies!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
A Lot of Hype
Source: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/homicidereport/2007/03/marchers_protes.html#more
Are Black-vs.-Brown Racial Tensions Driving Homicide in L.A.?
No. A few high-profile cases, including the suspected racially motivated killing of 15-year-old Cheryl Green in LAPD's Harbor Division, have fueled speculation of rising racial conflict in L.A. But among detectives and police officers who deal daily with homicides, the prevailing view is that the race problem--for now, anyway--remains marginal. "I don't think it's there," says Watts homicide Det. Chris Barling. Det. John Radtke, a South-Central homicide investigator, agrees. "We don't see it happening," he says. Statistics back them up.
Take the four most violent Los Angeles police precincts--Newton, 77th Street, Southwest and Southeast.
These racially mixed divisions cover South-Central Los Angeles and surrounding areas and consistently rank highest in homicides among the 19 LAPD precincts. Last year they accounted for nearly half of all the murders in the city.
But out of a total of 236 homicides in these four divisions last year, just 22 involved Latinos killing blacks, or blacks killing Latinos.
The vast majority--nearly 90%--involved suspects and victims of the same race. In a few other cases, the suspects are unknown, and could represent disparate races. But even in those--a mix of stray-bullet, gang- and narcotic-related killings--race is not believed to be a motive.
Detectives puzzled by racial homogeneity
In areas patrolled by the L.A. County Sheriff's Department, too, the pattern of killings on the street is “almost the opposite” of the picture lately highlighted in the media, sheriff's Cmdr. Pete Amico says.
The tilt is so far the other way that some homicide investigators say what actually perplexes them is how little racial crossover there is in killings.
Same-race murder predominates even where blacks and Latinos mix the most. In LAPD’s Southeast Division in Watts, for example, the population is at least 56% Latino and 40% black, according to U.S. Census numbers. But of 70 homicides reported there last year, only one was confirmed as black-on-Latino. No Latino-on-black killings occurred at all.
To be sure, tension between blacks and Latinos does exist in L.A., and a few murders result. For example, a string of racially motivated gang killings in Highland Park in the late 1990s went to trial in federal court last year.
Cherylgreenmom_charlene_lovett And detectives think the December killing by Latino gang members of Cheryl Green, who was black, was as purely race-driven as a crime can get. (Left, her mother holds her picture; Annie Wells/LAT). The subsequent killing of a witness in that case, and an unrelated racial beating case in Long Beach, has further inflamed public concern about racial violence.
But even in LAPD’s Harbor Division, where Green was killed, racial murder is an aberration.
Of the 20 homicides in the Harbor City-area precinct last year, only one other is confirmed to have involved Latino suspects and a black victim. That case had to do with a drug deal, not race, said Det. Jim Perkins, supervisor of Harbor's homicide squad.
In two other cases the suspects are unknown and may be of different races. But in general, Perkins said, Harbor-area killings involve Latino gangs fighting other Latino gangs over territory.
Where the trend is going is hard to gauge. Law enforcement officials throughout the county describe a fairly stable mix of Latino-vs.-Latino and black-vs.-black homicides over the years, punctuated by a few scattered skirmishes between gangs of different races, especially in border areas.
The sheriff’s Firestone area had one such flare-up two years ago. The dispute, purportedly over a drug deal, became so violent and so racially charged that black gangs began hunting Latinos indiscriminately and vice versa, said Sheriff’s Lt. Joe Hartshorne. At least two noncombatants--an older man and a fruit vendor--were killed simply because of race, he said.
More common, though, are black-vs.-Latino gang wars over traditional gang issues--such as territory or revenge, said Det. Kelle Baitx, of LAPD’s Newton Division. “It’s on gang lines. It’s territory, not a race thing,” he said.
Cross-racial homicide motives
Sometimes, black/Latino gang fights suggest as much about racial integration as they do about hostility.
Perkins, the Harbor detective, recalled two such conflicts in his division in recent years:
In one, a black and Latino gang had long agreed to share their drug territory, but a fight broke out over which gang could sell during the day and which at night. Retaliatory shootings played out for months.
In another, a local Latino gang that had welcomed black members was ordered by Mexican gang higher-ups to kick them out, and two people were killed, Perkins said.
Elsewhere, the smattering of black-vs.-Latino killings usually involve motives identical to those driving same-race killings.
In 77th Street Division, for example, a traditionally black Crip gang had welcomed a Latino into their midst, said Radtke, the 77th Street detective. The Latino Crip was later killed as the result of in-house gang argument.
In Newton Division, a black man killed a Latino neighbor in a dispute over loud music, and a Latino man killed a black acquaintance who had criticized his parenting style. There also have been recent black/Latino killings arising from narcotics deals, robberies, parties, insults and fights over women--all garden-variety motives common to same-race murders.
The fact that homicide seldom crosses racial lines here is not unique to L.A. Nationally, whites mostly kill whites, blacks mostly kill blacks, etc. It's been that way for a long time, both here and in the rest of the nation. “When you look at the trends, you don’t see tremendous change,” said Marianne Zawitz, statistician with the federal Bureau of Justice Statistics.
Concern is warranted
Still, there’s reason for concern, Radtke says.
Racial strife is rampant in prisons, he says, and drug-market competition between Latino gangs and black gangs could someday come to a head.
Black gangs are shrinking as Latino ones grow, he says, and while a balance of power may be keeping the status quo in place for now, authorities should keep watch. “I’m actually glad there has been such a response to the Harbor case,” Radtke says. Gangs that provoke racial conflict “should have the full force of the government on them.”
But other investigators are frustrated by what they call over-hyped stories of rising violence between races. “Crime here is race on race,” says Barling, the Watts detective. “The politicians always miss it.”
Source: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/homicidereport/2007/03/marchers_protes.html#more
Are Black-vs.-Brown Racial Tensions Driving Homicide in L.A.?
No. A few high-profile cases, including the suspected racially motivated killing of 15-year-old Cheryl Green in LAPD's Harbor Division, have fueled speculation of rising racial conflict in L.A. But among detectives and police officers who deal daily with homicides, the prevailing view is that the race problem--for now, anyway--remains marginal. "I don't think it's there," says Watts homicide Det. Chris Barling. Det. John Radtke, a South-Central homicide investigator, agrees. "We don't see it happening," he says. Statistics back them up.
Take the four most violent Los Angeles police precincts--Newton, 77th Street, Southwest and Southeast.
These racially mixed divisions cover South-Central Los Angeles and surrounding areas and consistently rank highest in homicides among the 19 LAPD precincts. Last year they accounted for nearly half of all the murders in the city.
But out of a total of 236 homicides in these four divisions last year, just 22 involved Latinos killing blacks, or blacks killing Latinos.
The vast majority--nearly 90%--involved suspects and victims of the same race. In a few other cases, the suspects are unknown, and could represent disparate races. But even in those--a mix of stray-bullet, gang- and narcotic-related killings--race is not believed to be a motive.
Detectives puzzled by racial homogeneity
In areas patrolled by the L.A. County Sheriff's Department, too, the pattern of killings on the street is “almost the opposite” of the picture lately highlighted in the media, sheriff's Cmdr. Pete Amico says.
The tilt is so far the other way that some homicide investigators say what actually perplexes them is how little racial crossover there is in killings.
Same-race murder predominates even where blacks and Latinos mix the most. In LAPD’s Southeast Division in Watts, for example, the population is at least 56% Latino and 40% black, according to U.S. Census numbers. But of 70 homicides reported there last year, only one was confirmed as black-on-Latino. No Latino-on-black killings occurred at all.
To be sure, tension between blacks and Latinos does exist in L.A., and a few murders result. For example, a string of racially motivated gang killings in Highland Park in the late 1990s went to trial in federal court last year.
Cherylgreenmom_charlene_lovett And detectives think the December killing by Latino gang members of Cheryl Green, who was black, was as purely race-driven as a crime can get. (Left, her mother holds her picture; Annie Wells/LAT). The subsequent killing of a witness in that case, and an unrelated racial beating case in Long Beach, has further inflamed public concern about racial violence.
But even in LAPD’s Harbor Division, where Green was killed, racial murder is an aberration.
Of the 20 homicides in the Harbor City-area precinct last year, only one other is confirmed to have involved Latino suspects and a black victim. That case had to do with a drug deal, not race, said Det. Jim Perkins, supervisor of Harbor's homicide squad.
In two other cases the suspects are unknown and may be of different races. But in general, Perkins said, Harbor-area killings involve Latino gangs fighting other Latino gangs over territory.
Where the trend is going is hard to gauge. Law enforcement officials throughout the county describe a fairly stable mix of Latino-vs.-Latino and black-vs.-black homicides over the years, punctuated by a few scattered skirmishes between gangs of different races, especially in border areas.
The sheriff’s Firestone area had one such flare-up two years ago. The dispute, purportedly over a drug deal, became so violent and so racially charged that black gangs began hunting Latinos indiscriminately and vice versa, said Sheriff’s Lt. Joe Hartshorne. At least two noncombatants--an older man and a fruit vendor--were killed simply because of race, he said.
More common, though, are black-vs.-Latino gang wars over traditional gang issues--such as territory or revenge, said Det. Kelle Baitx, of LAPD’s Newton Division. “It’s on gang lines. It’s territory, not a race thing,” he said.
Cross-racial homicide motives
Sometimes, black/Latino gang fights suggest as much about racial integration as they do about hostility.
Perkins, the Harbor detective, recalled two such conflicts in his division in recent years:
In one, a black and Latino gang had long agreed to share their drug territory, but a fight broke out over which gang could sell during the day and which at night. Retaliatory shootings played out for months.
In another, a local Latino gang that had welcomed black members was ordered by Mexican gang higher-ups to kick them out, and two people were killed, Perkins said.
Elsewhere, the smattering of black-vs.-Latino killings usually involve motives identical to those driving same-race killings.
In 77th Street Division, for example, a traditionally black Crip gang had welcomed a Latino into their midst, said Radtke, the 77th Street detective. The Latino Crip was later killed as the result of in-house gang argument.
In Newton Division, a black man killed a Latino neighbor in a dispute over loud music, and a Latino man killed a black acquaintance who had criticized his parenting style. There also have been recent black/Latino killings arising from narcotics deals, robberies, parties, insults and fights over women--all garden-variety motives common to same-race murders.
The fact that homicide seldom crosses racial lines here is not unique to L.A. Nationally, whites mostly kill whites, blacks mostly kill blacks, etc. It's been that way for a long time, both here and in the rest of the nation. “When you look at the trends, you don’t see tremendous change,” said Marianne Zawitz, statistician with the federal Bureau of Justice Statistics.
Concern is warranted
Still, there’s reason for concern, Radtke says.
Racial strife is rampant in prisons, he says, and drug-market competition between Latino gangs and black gangs could someday come to a head.
Black gangs are shrinking as Latino ones grow, he says, and while a balance of power may be keeping the status quo in place for now, authorities should keep watch. “I’m actually glad there has been such a response to the Harbor case,” Radtke says. Gangs that provoke racial conflict “should have the full force of the government on them.”
But other investigators are frustrated by what they call over-hyped stories of rising violence between races. “Crime here is race on race,” says Barling, the Watts detective. “The politicians always miss it.”
read this
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion...an07,0,793789.story?coll=la-sunday-commentary
-------------------------------------------
Roots of Latino/black anger
Longtime prejudices, not economic rivalry, fuel tensions.
By Tanya K. Hernandez
Tanya K. Hernandez is a professor of law at Rutgers University Law School.
January 7, 2007
THE ACRIMONIOUS relationship between Latinos and African Americans in Los Angeles is growing hard to ignore. Although last weekend's black-versus-Latino race riot at Chino state prison is unfortunately not an aberration, the Dec. 15 murder in the Harbor Gateway neighborhood of Cheryl Green, a 14-year-old African American, allegedly by members of a Latino gang, was shocking.
Yet there was nothing really new about it. Rather, the murder was a manifestation of an increasingly common trend: Latino ethnic cleansing of African Americans from multiracial neighborhoods. Just last August, federal prosecutors convicted four Latino gang members of engaging in a six-year conspiracy to assault and murder African Americans in Highland Park. During the trial, prosecutors demonstrated that African American residents (with no gang ties at all) were being terrorized in an effort to force them out of a neighborhood now perceived as Latino.
For example, one African American resident was murdered by Latino gang members as he looked for a parking space near his Highland Park home. In another case, a woman was knocked off her bicycle and her husband was threatened with a box cutter by one of the defendants, who said, "You niggers have been here long enough."
At first blush, it may be mystifying why such animosity exists between two ethnic groups that share so many of the same socioeconomic deprivations. Over the years, the hostility has been explained as a natural reaction to competition for blue-collar jobs in a tight labor market, or as the result of turf battles and cultural disputes in changing neighborhoods. Others have suggested that perhaps Latinos have simply been adept at learning the U.S. lesson of anti-black racism, or that perhaps black Americans are resentful at having the benefits of the civil rights movement extended to Latinos.
Although there may be a degree of truth to some or all of these explanations, they are insufficient to explain the extremity of the ethnic violence.
Over the years, there's also been a tendency on the part of observers to blame the conflict more on African Americans (who are often portrayed as the aggressors) than on Latinos. But although it's certainly true that there's plenty of blame to go around, it's important not to ignore the effect of Latino culture and history in fueling the rift.
The fact is that racism — and anti-black racism in particular — is a pervasive and historically entrenched reality of life in Latin America and the Caribbean. More than 90% of the approximately 10 million enslaved Africans brought to the Americas were taken to Latin America and the Caribbean (by the French, Spanish and British, primarily), whereas only 4.6% were brought to the United States. By 1793, colonial Mexico had a population of 370,000 Africans (and descendants of Africans) — the largest concentration in all of Spanish America.
The legacy of the slave period in Latin America and the Caribbean is similar to that in the United States: Having lighter skin and European features increases the chances of socioeconomic opportunity, while having darker skin and African features severely limits social mobility.
White supremacy is deeply ingrained in Latin America and continues into the present. In Mexico, for instance, citizens of African descent (who are estimated to make up 1% of the population) report that they regularly experience racial harassment at the hands of local and state police, according to recent studies by Antonieta Gimeno, then of Mount Holyoke College, and Sagrario Cruz-Carretero of the University of Veracruz.
Mexican public discourse reflects the hostility toward blackness; consider such common phrases as "getting black" to denote getting angry, and "a supper of blacks" to describe a riotous gathering of people. Similarly, the word "black" is often used to mean "ugly." It is not surprising that Mexicans who have been surveyed indicate a disinclination to marry darker-skinned partners, as reported in a 2001 study by Bobby Vaughn, an anthropology professor at Notre Dame de Namur University.
Anti-black sentiment also manifests itself in Mexican politics. During the 2001 elections, for instance, Lazaro Cardenas, a candidate for governor of the state of Michoacan, is believed to have lost substantial support among voters for having an Afro Cuban wife. Even though Cardenas had great name recognition (as the grandson of Mexico's most popular president), he only won by 5 percentage points — largely because of the anti-black platform of his opponent, Alfredo Anaya, who said that "there is a great feeling that we want to be governed by our own race, by our own people."
Given this, it should not be surprising that migrants from Mexico and other areas of Latin America and the Caribbean arrive in the U.S. carrying the baggage of racism. Nor that this facet of Latino culture is in turn transmitted, to some degree, to younger generations along with all other manifestations of the culture.
The sociological concept of "social distance" measures the unease one ethnic or racial group has for interacting with another. Social science studies of Latino racial attitudes often indicate a preference for maintaining social distance from African Americans. And although the social distance level is largest for recent immigrants, more established communities of Latinos in the United States also show a marked social distance from African Americans.
For instance, in University of Houston sociologist Tatcho Mindiola's 2002 survey of 600 Latinos in Houston (two-thirds of whom were Mexican, the remainder Salvadoran and Colombian) and 600 African Americans, the African Americans had substantially more positive views of Latinos than Latinos had of African Americans. Although a slim majority of the U.S.-born Latinos used positive identifiers when describing African Americans, only a minority of the foreign-born Latinos did so. One typical foreign-born Latino respondent stated: "I just don't trust them…. The men, especially, all use drugs, and they all carry guns."
This same study found that 46% of Latino immigrants who lived in residential neighborhoods with African Americans reported almost no interaction with them.
The social distance of Latinos from African Americans is consistently reflected in Latino responses to survey questions. In a 2000 study of residential segregation, Camille Zubrinsky Charles, a sociology professor at the University of Pennsylvania, found that Latinos were more likely to reject African Americans as neighbors than they were to reject members of other racial groups. In addition, in the 1999-2000 Lilly Survey of American Attitudes and Friendships, Latinos identified African Americans as their least desirable marriage partners, whereas African Americans proved to be more accepting of intermarriage with Latinos.
Ironically, African Americans, who are often depicted as being averse to coalition-building with Latinos, have repeatedly demonstrated in their survey responses that they feel less hostility toward Latinos than Latinos feel toward them.
Although some commentators have attributed the Latino hostility to African Americans to the stress of competition in the job market, a 1996 sociological study of racial group competition suggests otherwise. In a study of 477 Latinos from the 1992 Los Angeles County Social Survey, professors Lawrence Bobo, then of Harvard, and Vincent Hutchings of the University of Michigan found that underlying prejudices and existing animosities contribute to the perception that African Americans pose an economic threat — not the other way around.
It is certainly true that the acrimony between African Americans and Latinos cannot be resolved until both sides address their own unconscious biases about one another. But it would be a mistake to ignore the Latino side of the equation as some observers have done — particularly now, when the recent violence in Los Angeles has involved Latinos targeting peaceful African American citizens.
This conflict cannot be sloughed off as simply another generation of ethnic group competition in the United States (like the familiar rivalries between Irish, Italians and Jews in the early part of the last century). Rather, as the violence grows, the "diasporic" origins of the anti-black sentiment — the entrenched anti-black prejudice among Latinos that exists not just in the United States but across the Americas — will need to be directly confronted.
---------------------------------------
Bold and underlined emphasis was added.
It is GREAT to see someone validate what the fuck EDJ, myself and others have been saying in COUNTLESS threads now. I mentioned the fact that in mexico WHITE IS RIGHT, and that africans/blacks get the shaft, but now we have a professor saying the same damn thing and shedding more light on it.
PROPS TO THE PERSON WHO HIT ME ON PM AND SHOT ME THIS LINK!
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion...an07,0,793789.story?coll=la-sunday-commentary
-------------------------------------------
Roots of Latino/black anger
Longtime prejudices, not economic rivalry, fuel tensions.
By Tanya K. Hernandez
Tanya K. Hernandez is a professor of law at Rutgers University Law School.
January 7, 2007
THE ACRIMONIOUS relationship between Latinos and African Americans in Los Angeles is growing hard to ignore. Although last weekend's black-versus-Latino race riot at Chino state prison is unfortunately not an aberration, the Dec. 15 murder in the Harbor Gateway neighborhood of Cheryl Green, a 14-year-old African American, allegedly by members of a Latino gang, was shocking.
Yet there was nothing really new about it. Rather, the murder was a manifestation of an increasingly common trend: Latino ethnic cleansing of African Americans from multiracial neighborhoods. Just last August, federal prosecutors convicted four Latino gang members of engaging in a six-year conspiracy to assault and murder African Americans in Highland Park. During the trial, prosecutors demonstrated that African American residents (with no gang ties at all) were being terrorized in an effort to force them out of a neighborhood now perceived as Latino.
For example, one African American resident was murdered by Latino gang members as he looked for a parking space near his Highland Park home. In another case, a woman was knocked off her bicycle and her husband was threatened with a box cutter by one of the defendants, who said, "You niggers have been here long enough."
At first blush, it may be mystifying why such animosity exists between two ethnic groups that share so many of the same socioeconomic deprivations. Over the years, the hostility has been explained as a natural reaction to competition for blue-collar jobs in a tight labor market, or as the result of turf battles and cultural disputes in changing neighborhoods. Others have suggested that perhaps Latinos have simply been adept at learning the U.S. lesson of anti-black racism, or that perhaps black Americans are resentful at having the benefits of the civil rights movement extended to Latinos.
Although there may be a degree of truth to some or all of these explanations, they are insufficient to explain the extremity of the ethnic violence.
Over the years, there's also been a tendency on the part of observers to blame the conflict more on African Americans (who are often portrayed as the aggressors) than on Latinos. But although it's certainly true that there's plenty of blame to go around, it's important not to ignore the effect of Latino culture and history in fueling the rift.
The fact is that racism — and anti-black racism in particular — is a pervasive and historically entrenched reality of life in Latin America and the Caribbean. More than 90% of the approximately 10 million enslaved Africans brought to the Americas were taken to Latin America and the Caribbean (by the French, Spanish and British, primarily), whereas only 4.6% were brought to the United States. By 1793, colonial Mexico had a population of 370,000 Africans (and descendants of Africans) — the largest concentration in all of Spanish America.
The legacy of the slave period in Latin America and the Caribbean is similar to that in the United States: Having lighter skin and European features increases the chances of socioeconomic opportunity, while having darker skin and African features severely limits social mobility.
White supremacy is deeply ingrained in Latin America and continues into the present. In Mexico, for instance, citizens of African descent (who are estimated to make up 1% of the population) report that they regularly experience racial harassment at the hands of local and state police, according to recent studies by Antonieta Gimeno, then of Mount Holyoke College, and Sagrario Cruz-Carretero of the University of Veracruz.
Mexican public discourse reflects the hostility toward blackness; consider such common phrases as "getting black" to denote getting angry, and "a supper of blacks" to describe a riotous gathering of people. Similarly, the word "black" is often used to mean "ugly." It is not surprising that Mexicans who have been surveyed indicate a disinclination to marry darker-skinned partners, as reported in a 2001 study by Bobby Vaughn, an anthropology professor at Notre Dame de Namur University.
Anti-black sentiment also manifests itself in Mexican politics. During the 2001 elections, for instance, Lazaro Cardenas, a candidate for governor of the state of Michoacan, is believed to have lost substantial support among voters for having an Afro Cuban wife. Even though Cardenas had great name recognition (as the grandson of Mexico's most popular president), he only won by 5 percentage points — largely because of the anti-black platform of his opponent, Alfredo Anaya, who said that "there is a great feeling that we want to be governed by our own race, by our own people."
Given this, it should not be surprising that migrants from Mexico and other areas of Latin America and the Caribbean arrive in the U.S. carrying the baggage of racism. Nor that this facet of Latino culture is in turn transmitted, to some degree, to younger generations along with all other manifestations of the culture.
The sociological concept of "social distance" measures the unease one ethnic or racial group has for interacting with another. Social science studies of Latino racial attitudes often indicate a preference for maintaining social distance from African Americans. And although the social distance level is largest for recent immigrants, more established communities of Latinos in the United States also show a marked social distance from African Americans.
For instance, in University of Houston sociologist Tatcho Mindiola's 2002 survey of 600 Latinos in Houston (two-thirds of whom were Mexican, the remainder Salvadoran and Colombian) and 600 African Americans, the African Americans had substantially more positive views of Latinos than Latinos had of African Americans. Although a slim majority of the U.S.-born Latinos used positive identifiers when describing African Americans, only a minority of the foreign-born Latinos did so. One typical foreign-born Latino respondent stated: "I just don't trust them…. The men, especially, all use drugs, and they all carry guns."
This same study found that 46% of Latino immigrants who lived in residential neighborhoods with African Americans reported almost no interaction with them.
The social distance of Latinos from African Americans is consistently reflected in Latino responses to survey questions. In a 2000 study of residential segregation, Camille Zubrinsky Charles, a sociology professor at the University of Pennsylvania, found that Latinos were more likely to reject African Americans as neighbors than they were to reject members of other racial groups. In addition, in the 1999-2000 Lilly Survey of American Attitudes and Friendships, Latinos identified African Americans as their least desirable marriage partners, whereas African Americans proved to be more accepting of intermarriage with Latinos.
Ironically, African Americans, who are often depicted as being averse to coalition-building with Latinos, have repeatedly demonstrated in their survey responses that they feel less hostility toward Latinos than Latinos feel toward them.
Although some commentators have attributed the Latino hostility to African Americans to the stress of competition in the job market, a 1996 sociological study of racial group competition suggests otherwise. In a study of 477 Latinos from the 1992 Los Angeles County Social Survey, professors Lawrence Bobo, then of Harvard, and Vincent Hutchings of the University of Michigan found that underlying prejudices and existing animosities contribute to the perception that African Americans pose an economic threat — not the other way around.
It is certainly true that the acrimony between African Americans and Latinos cannot be resolved until both sides address their own unconscious biases about one another. But it would be a mistake to ignore the Latino side of the equation as some observers have done — particularly now, when the recent violence in Los Angeles has involved Latinos targeting peaceful African American citizens.
This conflict cannot be sloughed off as simply another generation of ethnic group competition in the United States (like the familiar rivalries between Irish, Italians and Jews in the early part of the last century). Rather, as the violence grows, the "diasporic" origins of the anti-black sentiment — the entrenched anti-black prejudice among Latinos that exists not just in the United States but across the Americas — will need to be directly confronted.
---------------------------------------
Bold and underlined emphasis was added.
It is GREAT to see someone validate what the fuck EDJ, myself and others have been saying in COUNTLESS threads now. I mentioned the fact that in mexico WHITE IS RIGHT, and that africans/blacks get the shaft, but now we have a professor saying the same damn thing and shedding more light on it.
PROPS TO THE PERSON WHO HIT ME ON PM AND SHOT ME THIS LINK!
yep, read that article. If people were really up on their history this shouldn't be a surprise. Now onto the Cherokee who are kickin the freedmen (half black/ half cherokee descendants of black slaves and Cherokees) out of the tribe, but allowing the half white/half Cherokees to stay and gobble up that $22B they make each year. Blacks have to come together if they want to start the process of peace, cuz as you see; white supremacy is prevalent through every culture whites have come in contact with and overpowered.
