So what do we call ourselves?
For decades Latinos have debated over the question of what to call themselves. This struggle for a national identity in the United States is evident in the myriad polls posing the question to Latinos across the country: Do you refer to yourself as ‘Hispanic’ or ‘Latino’?
Most surveys reveal a slight preference for ‘Hispanic’ in general usage; however the term elicits more controversy than ‘Latino’. Deciding on a term of national Latino identity involves generational, social and political considerations.
A recent Presidential tracking poll of Latinos found regional leanings as well; Texans liked ‘Hispanic’, while California and New York preference was almost evenly split, in Illinois they prefer Latino, and in New Mexico they are Hispano. When addressing each other, most Latinos exercise sensitivity when referencing national origin but tend to be less guarded themselves, responding to either ‘Hispanic’ or ‘Latino’.
When offered the choice, most Latinos prefer ‘none of the above’ opting for a term closer to their national origin. A 2006 poll of first-generation Latinos found that one-third prefer ‘Hispanic’, one-third called themselves ‘Latinos’, and one-third referred to themselves by their country of origin.
Choosing one term to identify such a diverse people may be an exercise in futility.
Hispanic
U.S.-born Latinos prefer to identify themselves as ‘Hispanic’. These more acculturated, second- and third-generation Latinos tend to be young, conservative registered voters and regard the term as politically correct.
Critics of the term ‘Hispanic’ describe it as an attempt to homogenize all Latinos – a carefree generic labeling by the dominant socio-political power structure. The term first appeared on government publications, notably the 1970 Census, and has now become ingrained in our daily language. President Richard Nixon receives most of the blame for introducing ‘Hispanic’ into the American lexicon.
Latino
“Latino” is preferred by older or more liberal Latinos many with histories of political activism and radical tendencies. The term is deemed more inclusive than ‘Hispanic’ dating back to ancient Rome and the Latin romance language.
Latina Magazine chose its name with the help of focus groups which found that women responded more positively to the term ‘Latina’, but uses both ‘Hispanic’ and ‘Latino’ interchangeably within its pages.
Media usage of the term varies as well. Spanish-language media almost exclusively uses “Latino” with few exceptions. English-language media interchanges between “Latino” and “Hispanic.”
The term “Latino” seems to be gaining broader appeal, or could it be that those who prefer “Latino” are just louder?
So at the end of the day choosing the correct term is all based on regional/political bias and on personal preference.
Origin of “Hispanic”
‘Hispanic’ is the term used to identify the group in most U.S. government publications, yet the term’s historical reference elicits controversy in many communities.
For 20,000 years, the Iberian Peninsula had been inhabited by North African expansion into what is now considered the homeland of the Caucasian race. When the Phoenicians arrived at Europe’s western-most peninsula in the eighth century BC, they christened her, Hispania.
Hispania was invaded from the north and the south by the Celts and the Greeks during the sixth century BC, near the borders of the Basques. The Greeks introduced philosophy and theater along with the cultivation of olive trees and vineyards.
From the second century BC to approximately 400 AD, the Romans dominated Hispania, leaving behind 600 years of cultural influence, most noteworthy, Roman judicial law and the Latin language. The most significant derivative of Latin, the Spanish language is spoken today by half a billion people.
The Goths and Vandals invaded Hispania in 408 AD bringing with them a legacy of cattle breeding, ranching and bullfighting. Nomadic gypsies introduced flamenco dancing.
In the seventh century AD, Islamic Arabs invaded the peninsula. The kingdom of Portugal was established in the twelfth century with the imposition of a separate Latin dialect. 500 years later El Cid initiated the Christian reconquest of Hispania.
At the close of the fifteenth century AD, the Catholic Kings – Castile and Aragon – united and expelled the Arabs and all other non-Christians forming Spain. In 1492, they financed the greatest expedition in the history of humanity, the conquest of the Americas.
Most Latinos are a blend of Hispanic and African immigrants and pre-Columbian ancestors sharing a rich, diverse heritage.
Great topic – and one of increasing importance.
Aren’t both terms equally homogenizing? For the purposes of convenience and being concise the use of these terms is inevitable – like Asian, European, etc.
Within a generation or two, it is likely that this point will be moot. According to the Pew Research Center, there will be “more school-age Hispanic children than school-age non-Hispanic white children by 2050″. So, like “Italian-American” and “Irish-American”, I would imagine that these terms will eventually become a way to identify immigrant groups that contributed to the shaping of American culture.