Has previously noted, a good chunk of the SW United States is Spanish speaking (and has been ab initio), and a good chunk of Canada is French. The linguistic and cultural uniformity you mention does not exist.
Besides, if continents are determined by cultural and linguistic uniformity, then what is Europe, or Asia, or Africa?
But as has repeatedly been pointed out, no other continent is linguistically and culturally homogeneous, so why should you expect North America to be? (Not that the USA and Canada are all that linguistically and culturally homogeneous, really.) You seem to want “North America” to mean “the USA, plus I will allow Canada in since they are really just like Americans, only more polite”. Sorry, it does not work that way, and never has.
PRECISELY. Not 100% clear, is it, which continent Turkey “belongs” to? México is obviously part of “the Americas.” To me it’s not so obvious that it’s part of NORTH America.
Geography takes precedence. Clearly Canada is north of the U.S. of A. and the U.S. of A. are north of Los Estados Unidos de México. I see a HUGE land mass taken up by the countries of Canada and the U.S. of A. at the top part of the American continent. To me it can very well be argued that México is the northern part of Central America just as easily as it can be argued that México is the southern part of North America. Given that Mexicans tend to have more in common, culturally and linguistically, with those who live south of them, that’s how I tend to think of things. You want to lump México in with the largely English-speaking and northern-European-identifying countries above it, you go right ahead. You just won’t see me agreeing with you that that makes a whole lot of sense.
There is no such thing. Any appearances to that effect are a mirage. After what my wife has told me I’ve come to the realization that if countries and ethnic groups existed on this planet in a 1-1 ratio then the world political map would look a LOT different than it does today and there’d be a LOT more countries than there are now.
So you came here with a chip on your shoulder to tell off the gabachos? Thank you so very much. Now go away if that’s all you’ve got. If you would care to be productive…lose the chip.
You are starting to get it. There is no such thing as Europe or Africa, because they are full of multiple cultures, more cultures than there are countries, in fact. So why should North America be defined by US and Canadian cultures(minus Quebec, Louisiana, and much of the US southwest)being similiar? The answer is: because its not! North America is defined as a landmass, which does not care about what people speak what language where, just as Africa is defined as a landmass.
Don’t know what gabachos are and I don’t have a chip on my shoulder about this. I just don’t see how some people can view México being part of North America as being so clear-cut.
Correct. But as I alluded to before just where does Africa end and Asia start? Just where does Europe end and Asia start? I think it depends upon to whom you’re speaking. Just as “Exactly which part of ‘the Americas’ is México really part of?” is a question which will probably yield different answers depending upon whom one is speaking with. For those of you who are so certain that México is part of N.A. - how many people who live in México do you think would agree with you on that?
All of my realitives do. But it’s OK if you don’t because we understand that there are ignorant people out that like to push argumentative positions. You have come to the right place because here is where we fight such nonsense. It’s taking longer than we thought.
There are really no objective right answers to any of this. Continents are defined by human beings for various purposes, and depending on who you ask, there are as many as seven or as few as four (and multiple different ways for coming up with the numbers 5 or 6).
Personally, I would say this is North America, which seems pretty sensible to me in terms of physical geography–there is a land connection to South America, but the connection is very narrow and immediately widens out into the South American mainland. I would call this Central America, though if you’re going to go by physical geography (and maybe cultural geography as well) rather than political geography, you could include the part of Mexico east of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec in Central America.
Finally, note that there is already a perfectly good region called Latin America which recognizes the cultural divide that (more-or-less) exists at the U.S.-Mexican border; Latin America of course straddles the physical-geographic line between North and South America.
Obviously not the government of Mexico - they called the North American Free Trade Agreement “Tratado de Libre Comercio deAmérica del Norte”.
I mean that’s not even in English.
That and the Mexican people look down on the people from the Central American countries like some Americans do Mexicans.
So much for people on the SDMB being more restrained. I’d take you to the pit but you’re not worth my time.
Then quite replying. Your thread actually belongs in the Great Debates because you do nothing but attempt to refute facts that people give you. Facts like the tectonic plates that Mexico share with the United States and Canada. Facts like the Mexican people considering themselves as part of Mexico. Even a Cananadan has chimed in a said they consider part of North America. Yet you continue to yammer to say such brilliant things as I believe this. I can’t understand that.
Mexico is part of North America. So is Nicaragua and Panama. The dividing line between North and South America is the Panamanian-Colombian border. Central America is not a separate continent but a subset of North America, similar to how Southeast Asia is not a separate continent from Asia. Mexico is not in Central America. Central America is Guatemala to Panama.
Thus be what I was taught in school.
Our OP seems to be hung up in that the “North” American designator should be a cultural one, as whatever is Not-“Latin”-America. I’d find that itself troublesome because if you created a division of Latin/Ibero-America vs Anglo-Franco-America, you’d still end up with overlaps and exclaves and then there’s a small contingent of Dutch thrown in just to get people annoyed.
Suffice it to be said that among Latin Americans I’ve never seen any trouble with considering most of Mexico to be geographically in the North American continental mainland, while just as well culturally in Latin America, and for varying purposes part of the Central American and Caribbean Region (which happens to include parts of the coastal countries of northern South America). It just works that way.
And as mentioned earlier, if you’re going by plate tectonics, everything down to Yucatan and Cuba is in the North American Plate (former part of Laurasia); everything up to Colombia and Venezuela is in the South American Plate, (former part of Gondwana), and the bit in the middle is our own little plate, apparently from a former oceanic hotspot. Those two larger landmasses were separate entities all the way back to the breakup of Pangaea until the land bridge was finally wedged closed some 5 million years ago.
Let me guess, OP couldn’t edit the Wiki to include Mexico with Central America, and he came here because he thought we would know better.
Come on OP, lighten up!
It’s because we are smarter than you, which is why you came here, remember? Unfortunately, you not only were not smart enough to figure out for yourself that Mexico is unquestionably part of North America, you also are not smart enough to accept that it is indeed, even when bombarded with facts that clearly establish the point.
This is not the place to come for support of a preconceived notion that varies with fact. If you actually want to learn, we can help you. If you want to impress your vision upon the world, I afraid we can’t help you.
Long ago, I shared a house with an (Asian Indian) fellow from Guyana. Although Guyana is geographically on the continent of South America, this guy was very insistent that he was West Indian – to call a Guyanese a “South American” is apparently “fighting talk”: they’re proud of the British origins of their culture, and look down on those sleazy Latin types who inhabit the rest of the South American continent. (I don’t know whether the people of Surinam and French Guiana feel the same way.)
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}