Sonia Sotomayor, Obama’s pick for the Supreme Court, is being billed as the first Hispanic Justice, but clearly under the definition of Hispanic, “persons of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Dominican, Central or South American, or others Spanish or Portuguese culture or origin, regardless of race,” Benjamin Cardozo, whose surname is Portuguese, was the first Hispanic Justice.
Everyone says that Bill Richardson is an Hispanic governor, and I don’t see how Bill Richardson is any more Hispanic than Benjamin Cardozo.
Sotomayor’s assertion that “a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male” really rubs me the wrong way.
* * *
Peter A writes;
Portuguese are not Hispanics. Anyone who has lived in an area with a significant Portuguese population knows this. That's like saying Sicilians are Hispanic.
If your point is that Portuguese are white Europeans, then my response is, “of course they are!” But whiteness has nothing to do with the official definition of Hispanic. Why do you think we always have to use the phrase “non-Hispanic white” when talking about U.S. Census and other survey data? Because respondents are allowed to say they are white and Hispanic.
“Hispanic” is an incredibly dumb definition. People really want to talk about race and not whether someone’s last name is Spanish or Portuguese. White Americans whose families moved here from Spain or Portugal have none of the social problems associated with non-White minorities.
When people use the word “Hispanic” they are probably thinking of people from the Americas other than Canada and the United States with at least some Amerindian ancestry. In other places someone of mixed Amerindian and white ancestry is called “Mestizo,” a phrase which liberals won’t use because they think it implies that there’s something wrong with mixing the races. “Mulatto” isn’t a very popular term either.
Because “Hispanic” implies non-white, even though it’s not part of the official definition, is why most Americans with Spanish and Portuguese ancestry don’t want to be called “Hispanic,” because they want to be considered regular white Americans like people who moved here from other European countries. Liberals might say this makes them sort of racist for not wanting to be grouped with non-whites.
Portoghees are not hispanics. Anyone who has lived in an area with a significant Portuguese population knows this. That's like saying Sicilians are hispanic. Of course the whole idea of "hispanic" is pretty suspect anyway.
Posted by: Peter A | May 26, 2009 at 11:31 AM
HS, I'm sure you know that Benjamin Cardozo's ancestors were Sephardic Jews who came to North America in the mid-18th century. So I guess being Jewish trumps being Hispanic, but who can really understand such mysteries?
By the way, Cardozo, a liberal Democrat, was appointed by the Republican Herbert Hoover - this was hailed as a triumph of non-partisanism. Can you imagine such a thing happening today?
And I completey agree that Sotomayor's comment is highly offensive. Look at the trouble Trent Lott got into for making a much milder comment concerning Strom Thurmond's run for the presidency in 1948. But since Sotomayor is a liberal Hispanic woman Democrat, the PC police will give her a pass.
Posted by: Ned | May 26, 2009 at 11:49 AM
If only she were a dyke too!
Posted by: 40oz of Hate | May 26, 2009 at 12:11 PM
My experience with Portuguese people is that they hate nothing more than being called Hispanic. In fact I used to tease my best friend about it and it never got old. That said, I dont think Spaniards direct from Spain generally consider themselves Hispanic either, but if that's what the legal definition says, then so be it.
Posted by: Stopped Clock | May 26, 2009 at 12:44 PM
"Sotomayor’s assertion that “a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male” really rubs me the wrong way."
A couple years ago, I saw a button somewhere that said something like: "Diversity made me a racist". I wish I bought one of those!
Posted by: Wade Nichols | May 26, 2009 at 12:55 PM
Obama is just trying to cash in on another "Historic" event. It wouldn't matter if there had already been 3 hispanics on the Court he'd still twist the facts to fulfill his political purposes. MSNBC says she's the first hispanic period and FOX says it was Cardozo. People will believe what they want anyway.
Posted by: Joe | May 26, 2009 at 01:03 PM
"Sotomayor’s assertion that “a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male” really rubs me the wrong way."
Sickening smugness. Don't expect humility or wisdom from that one.
Posted by: Tom | May 26, 2009 at 01:19 PM
This may work out for conservatives in the longrun.
First of all, Sotomayor is not likely to rule much differently on controversial issues than the leftwing Souter would. So her appointment is a wash in terms of ideological balance on the court.
Secondly, the liberal intelligentsia was (behind the scenes) not enthusiastic about Sotomayor because they wanted someone with serious intellectual firepower to go head to head with the very high IQ Scalia and the even higher IQ John Roberts (See the Jeffrey Rosen piece in the New Republic*).
Instead of having a legal superstar, the left is stuck being represented with a blatantly obvious affirmative action mediocrity who will be routinely made to look like a fool by the intellectually superior conservative Justices.
She is a perfect symbol of leftism's intellectual decline.
* The Case Against Sotomayor
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=45d56e6f-f497-4b19-9c63-04e10199a085
Posted by: The Undiscovered Jew | May 26, 2009 at 01:28 PM
I'm sure the good Senora Sotomayor has great wisdom when it comes to cooking bueno comida. She looks well fed. Doubtful going hungry like some campesino would was part of the uh, "struggles" she faced. So yes, I'd defer to her judgement when making tamales...
Posted by: Manteca | May 26, 2009 at 01:34 PM
"'Hispanic' is an incredibly dumb definition."
Where I work Hispanics have the official status of being tracked by percentages to be sure they are not being overlooked for promotions. This means that managers are supposed to give them extra coaching and be sure to consider them for promotions. But what is funny is that these Hispanic engineers are all white guys. So they are a protected minority of white guys. It is like having an affirmative action program for white German-American engineers. Pretty funny, but pretty stupid too.
Posted by: Dan Morgan | May 26, 2009 at 02:53 PM
My wife's father is from Portugal. I just asked her if she considered herself Hispanic. She said definitely not, in general, but yes when it works to her advantage.
Posted by: Qua Lude | May 26, 2009 at 03:15 PM
"But what is funny is that these Hispanic engineers are all white guys."
What Latin American countries are they descended from?
Posted by: The Undiscovered Jew | May 26, 2009 at 03:17 PM
Mankiw has a post on Sotomayor's low future time orientation:
http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2009/05/scotus-appointee-is-spender.html
Posted by: Gene | May 26, 2009 at 03:48 PM
"Sotomayor’s assertion that “a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male” really rubs me the wrong way."
It should. She's both sexist and racist. Do you want a sexist, racist Supreme Court justice? Do you want to stand before her in a trial? Do you think your case would get fair treatment from such a woman?
Could you imagine the political backlash if a white man said "a wise northern European man with the richness of his experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Hispanic female"? That man would be branded as pure evil. The MSM would spend a week on the story. The president who appointed him would lose 10 points in polls. And if a push was made to continue with the nomination there would probably be a march on Washington.
Lawrence H. Summers was pushed out of Harvard for less.
Why no backlash for her comment? Because it's OK to be sexist and racist so long as you're anti-male and anti-white. The problem is that white males don't throw a fit when something like this happens. And if they dare try to they're automatically branded Nazis.
Posted by: Daniel L. Taylor | May 26, 2009 at 03:54 PM
Hispanic refers to people from Spanish speaking countries, not people from lands that speak Portuguese. Neither the Portuguese nor the Brazilians are Hispanics by definition. Portuguese-Americans are not considered Hispanics by the Census Bureau. Funny as it may sound, a white Argentine-American is entitled to affirmative action under the law, but a mulatto or mestizo from Brazil is not.
Posted by: tommy | May 26, 2009 at 04:11 PM
"Sotomayor’s assertion . . . really rubs me the wrong way. "
Me too. Anyway, it's depressing to watch the country taking another small step down the road to disaster.
Posted by: sabril | May 26, 2009 at 07:30 PM
"Hispanic refers to people from Spanish speaking countries, not people from lands that speak Portuguese. Neither the Portuguese nor the Brazilians are Hispanics by definition"
It depends what definition you use. By some definitions, Portugese and Brazillians are included. If you don't believe me, check dictionary.com.
Actually it's a peeve of mine in life how some people insist that they possess the One True Definition of some word.
Posted by: sabril | May 26, 2009 at 07:32 PM
There's something quite possibly Asian-looking about Sotomayor. I wouldn't be surprised if one of her grandfathers was a Chinese immigrant shopkeeper in San Juan.
Posted by: Peter | May 26, 2009 at 08:12 PM
"Could you imagine the political backlash if a white man said "a wise northern European man with the richness of his experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Hispanic female"?"
Remember you can only a be a racist if it's about NAM's, especially blacks. I've had so many conversations about HBD where people accuse me of racism because I think whites are on average more intelligent than blacks. But then I ask am I racist because I think Asians and Jews are more intelligent than whites? The answer: Well they never answer it, they just call me a racist again.
Posted by: OneSTDV | May 27, 2009 at 12:27 AM
"Could you imagine the political backlash if a white man said "a wise northern European man with the richness of his experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Hispanic female"?"
It's all an intra-white status game. Blacks, mestizos, and asians all know what's up. They are ethnocentric and proud. Whites have no interest in squelching the ethnocentrism of other groups.
Not to sound too much like Whiskey, but a lot of it is driven by white women. Political correctness is largely a tool used by white women to tear down white men. If a guy named Alberto Sotomayor had made the same statement about a "wise Latino man" and a "white woman", he would be getting a much different treatment.
Sotomayor's selection, along with her statement, are just more evidence of the nascent race war that every race but whites is already fighting. In the late 21st century, when mestizos are the majority, I sincerely doubt they will be as complacent as whites are now.
Posted by: uselessidiot | May 27, 2009 at 02:41 AM
What's most disheartening is that the objectivity we strove for in our legal system is what made it so great. As this country descends into race-war politics, we will become just like the third-world hellhole that these immigrants were trying to escape.
Posted by: uselessidiot | May 27, 2009 at 02:45 AM
"Benjamin Cardozo, whose surname is Portuguese, was the first Hispanic Justice."
Cardozo's familial roots may have been in a Latin/Hispanic country, but he did not have Latin/Hispanic ancestry...he was Jewish (Sephardic) and was thus of ethnically Semitic background, not of Hispanic/Latino ethnic stock.
[HS: Judaism is a religion, not a race.]
Posted by: correction | May 27, 2009 at 05:49 AM
"There's something quite possibly Asian-looking about Sotomayor. I wouldn't be surprised if one of her grandfathers was a Chinese immigrant shopkeeper in San Juan."
I had the same thought.
Posted by: Andy | May 27, 2009 at 06:47 AM
In the 1977 edition of Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary,the "term "Hispanic" is defined as "of or realating to the people,speech or culture of Spain,Spain and Portugal,or Latin America." Wikipedia expresses the meaning of "Hispanic" to be "a term that historically has denoted relation to the ancient Hispania and its peoples."Finally,Title 49,section 26.5 of the Code of Federal Regulations defines "Hispanic American" to include persons of Portugese origin.Those who want to protest may do so -it is their right-but the last definition is an official one.
Posted by: Moshe of Rockville,MD | May 27, 2009 at 08:39 PM
I believe I read somewhere that the Federal government does not classify as hispanic Spanish immigrants and people of Spanish descent, as Spain is a European country. Presumably, the same would apply to the Portugese.
"Hispanic" is an awkward bureaucratic construction, and I suspect that people will always disagree as to what it means. There are a lot of Latin Americans who are for all intents and purposes of European ancestry. When these people move to the US, they are "hispanic," but what about their children and grandchildren? What if you come from Argentina, Brazil, or Uruguay, but look like you come from Estonia and have a Welsh (Argentina), Italian (Brazil), or German (Uruguay) surname? And what about your kids?
The 21st century is going to get complicated. Actually, it's complicated enough already.
Posted by: Dr. Horsemeat | May 28, 2009 at 01:38 AM
Moshe of Rockville said: "Finally,Title 49,section 26.5 of the Code of Federal Regulations defines "Hispanic American" to include persons of Portugese origin."
I didn't read this before I posted my comment. Apparently, people of Portugese ancestry are classified as hispanic. Is it the case that the Federal definition of hispanic excludes those of Spanish descent, and if so, by what rationale, if it includes the Portugese?
.
Posted by: Dr. Horsemeat | May 28, 2009 at 01:45 AM
"HS: Judaism is a religion, not a race."
Jews are not a "race" but they are definitely a distinct ethnic group. Thus genetic science disproves your statement that there is no ethnic (i.e., genetic) component to being Jewish; see: http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2008/04/snps-dont-lie.php & http://scienceblogs.com/gnxp/2009/01/how_ashkenazi_jewish_are_you.php -- additionally, Jews suffer from various genetic disorders caused by many centuries of too much inbreeding...see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashkenazi_Jews#Specific_diseases_and_disorders & http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sephardi#Medicine
Jews generally disagree with your statement as well - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_ethnic_divisions
Also, there are many atheists who still refer to themselves as Jews. Explanation?
[HS: There are Chinese, "Hispanic," and black Jews, it's a religion. Ashkenazi Jews are an ethnicity, but not a race no more than Polish are a different race than Germans.]
Posted by: correction | May 28, 2009 at 06:13 AM
I am Portuguese American and I do not consider myself hispanic no one in my family has ever used that term and neither does a majority of portuguese americans.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/05/defining-hispanic.html
The Census Bureau added the “Hispanic” query at the last minute at the insistence of President Nixon, who astutely saw the large number of Mexican-Americans in his native California as an indicator that Hispanics were becoming an important voting bloc.
Today, except at the Library of Congress and the Small Business Administration, the consensus tends to be that Portuguese-Americans are not Hispanic. “I personally do not classify Portuguese under the `Hispanic’ or `Latino’ label, and I would say the majority [of Portuguese-Americans] do not as well,” says Jason Moreira, executive assistant of the Portuguese American Leadership Council of the United States.
Stop with the label nonesense and get back to the issue is Sonia Sotomayor more about ideology and how is she going to interpret the constitution?
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=45d56e6f-f497-4b19-9c63-04e10199a085
And because of this my feeling is Republicans and Democrats have failed this country!instead of talking about real issues that effect all LEGAL americans the rat bloggers scramble for nonsense topics.
http://www.ronpaul.com (one of the last real Americans )limited constitutional government, low taxes, free markets, and a return to sound monetary policies!
Posted by: Not Hispanic | May 28, 2009 at 06:14 AM
"Judaism is a religion, not a race."
There are far more non-religious Jews whom everyone would agree are Jews by ancestry than there are non-Jews who convert to Judaism. Jewishness is more a race (or at least an ethnicity) than a religion.
[HS: Ashkenazi Jews are a white European ethnicity. There are other races and ethnicities who are also Jewish, although Ashkenazi are the vast majority of Jews in the United States.]
Posted by: tommy | May 28, 2009 at 04:09 PM
"HS: Ashkenazi Jews are a white European ethnicity."
NOPE. Need I again post the links to the science proving that Jews are genetically/ethnically different from White Europeans? - http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2008/04/snps-dont-lie.php & http://scienceblogs.com/gnxp/2009/01/how_ashkenazi_jewish_are_you.php
However, quite a few Ashkenazi Jews have intermarried with people of White/European stock either in Europe, the USA, Canada, Australia, etc in the past century or so...hence the confusion. But people with 4 Ashkenazi grandparents are, as the above links point out, genetically distinct from people of White European descent.
[HS: No more distinct than people with 4 Polish grandaprents are distinct from people with 4 French grandparents. Distinct, but still white European. Why the hell do certain people want to classify Ashkenazi as not white? Anti-Semitism?]
Posted by: correction | May 29, 2009 at 12:21 AM
But people with 4 Ashkenazi grandparents are, as the above links point out, genetically distinct from people of White European descent.
No you're wrong.
In those charts, Jews do not cluster with Palestinians or Arabs, genetically.
In the below chart, Jews cluster with Armenians, Greeks and Southern Italians.
Unless you want to argue that Armenians, Greeks and Southern Italians are not white, then Jews are white too:
http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2008/04/europeans-jews-and-middle-easterners.php
Posted by: The Undiscovered Jew | May 29, 2009 at 12:54 AM
Jews are Southeastrn Europeans if you include Armenians, Greeks and Southern Italians in the European family branch and most people consider all three groups to be white.
[HS: Ashkenazi Jews are fairer skinned than southern Italians, they are much more like northern Italians, the kind which people in American are less familiar with because most Italian-Americans are Sicilian.
I have personally noted how Polish Jews look very similar to Polish gentiles, an example of how Jews are very similar to the country the come from.]
Posted by: The Undiscovered Jew | May 29, 2009 at 12:59 AM
"Ashkenazi Jews are fairer skinned than southern Italians,"
We are about as light skinned as Armenians are, and frankly, of all ethnic groups I think we look closer to Armenians in terms of facial morphology than we do to anyone else.
Posted by: The Undiscovered Jew | May 29, 2009 at 01:32 AM