# “The Hispanic Challenge” to American Culture: Has Samuel Huntington Gone Bonkers? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 22, 2004, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hispanic-challenge-to-american-culture-has-samuel-huntington-gone-bonkers/235774 "2004-03-22T21:38:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Eva\_Luna](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e495f1/32.png) [@Eva\_Luna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eva_Luna)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2004, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hispanic-challenge-to-american-culture-has-samuel-huntington-gone-bonkers/235774/1 "2004-03-22T21:38:30Z")
In the current issue of _Foreign Policy_, Samuel Huntington argues that “The persistent inflow of Hispanic immigrants threatens to divide the United States into two peoples, two cultures, and two languages. Unlike past immigrant groups, Mexicans and other Latinos have not assimilated into mainstream U.S. culture, forming instead their own political and linguistic enclaves—from Los Angeles to Miami—and rejecting the Anglo-Protestant values that built the American dream. The United States ignores this challenge at its peril.” (complete article at [http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story\_id=2495](http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=2495)) Now I haven’t read his _Clash of Civilizations,_ but well, this is sounding like tinfoil hat material than me; most evidence I’ve seen from other sources suggests than Hispanic immigrant families speak English as their primary language within a couple of generations, as has historically been the case with other non-Anglo-Saxon immigrants to the U.S. Among other arguments, he indicates that the already significant rate of intermarriage of Latina women is likely to decrease rather than increase over time, on the argument that in the future, as the Latino proportion of the U.S. population increases, they won’t have to marry non-Latinos. Seems like he’s cherry-picking his facts to me, not to mention making some major and unwarranted leaps of logic. Your thoughts? ---
**Author:** ![Unregistered\_Bull](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3da27b/32.png) [@Unregistered\_Bull](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unregistered_Bull)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2004, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hispanic-challenge-to-american-culture-has-samuel-huntington-gone-bonkers/235774/2 "2004-03-22T22:18:41Z")
I don’t see how the dreams are different. Nice vehicle, nice place to live, and a good family. Language and culture yes. But dialect and culture is different throughout the US. Thank God because I don’t like a some of the other US cultures’ attitudes and Yankees sound funny 😉 . ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2004, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hispanic-challenge-to-american-culture-has-samuel-huntington-gone-bonkers/235774/3 "2004-03-22T22:26:39Z")
Its a bunch of horseshit IMO. My dad,who’s account this is, is actually FROM Mexico, though my mom is of english decent. My mothers father was from Wales. I was born in Tuscon Az, so I’m first generation US citizen on my fathers side, second on my mothers. I speak flawless english, with a southwest accent not a mexican accent, and to be honest don’t speak much spanish at all, as it was never really emphasized in our house. English was. Sure, we’ve held on to some of our culture, but we’ve almost completely integrated into US society. I have a huge extended family (most of who live in Az or NM, some in California, some still living in Mexico of course by they don’t count for this) and in almost all the cases they too have integrated into US society. Traditions are just that, traditions, and frankly most of them revolve around religion as most of my family are very religious. Something else that isn’t emphasized in my family, but thats another story. My dad is a perfect example…he’s from Mexico but came to the US when he was 8 ON HIS OWN. Sure, he speaks with a bit of an accent, but he has totally integrated into US society, and raised his children, my sister, brother and I, to be english speaking Americans. We are proud to be Americans, and I for one thank my lucky stars I was born here. I’ve visited my uncles and aunts and other family members in Mexico and I would never want to live there. I don’t see how holding on to your traditions and some of your culture is a problem. My Jewish friends hold on to their traditions and even language as many of them speak yiddish still, and after all and no one thinks that is going to split the country into two camps. Blacks have their own traditions, orientals their own traditions and language also, yet we are all Americans. And as the Eva Luna said, within a few generations at most (sometimes within a single generation) most people tend to integrate in quite nicely, though keeping possibly some of their language and culture. And this shouldn’t be a problem. Sorry if this post wasn’t very coherent. I never write in GD (I like CS as its more my level) as some of you people are scary and I’m not very good at this stuff. I’m also only 16 y.o. so my perspective on things isn’t what some of yours is. But when I saw this thread I just wanted to put in my 2 cents. -XT ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2004, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hispanic-challenge-to-american-culture-has-samuel-huntington-gone-bonkers/235774/4 "2004-03-22T22:33:42Z")
Exactly the same things were said about the Italians. Exactly the same things were said about the Chinese. After awhile you do have to wonder when Chicken Little is going to shut up. Huntington’s essay is sheer racism any way you slice it; he doesn’t even bother to disguise it. According to him, Hispanics are different in terms of their “Values” from the “white, British, Protestant” immigrants who made up this country. This is absolute crap on two fronts: 1. Of course their values aren’t different. What a load. 2. The United States in 2003 is not really constructed of “white, British, Protestant” people anyway, and the notion that its laws and values are uniquely “white, British, Protestant” is nonsense. Huntington is one of those (very few) strange Americans who seems to believe democracy and freedom are uniquely American things, as if they exist nowhere else in the world. Huntington seems to be implying that Hispanics are somehow incapable of understanding the Declaration of Independence, but what really betrays his stupidity is this: > [@](#): > > The U.S. Founding Fathers considered the dispersion of immigrants essential to their assimilation. That has been the pattern historically That is absolutely, unequivocally false. I don’t know if the Fouding Fathers really believed this or even gave a shit, but this has NOT been the pattern historically, and anyone who says it is is an idiot. Immigrants have always, always, always gathered primarily in the geographic regions where they entered, and were especially prevalent in urban ghettoes. The Italians, the Irish, the Chinese, the Poles, the Germans; absolutely without exception every major influx of immigrants concentrated in EXACTLY the same way Hispanics are concentrating today. The only minority ethnic groups I can think of that did not do this were blacks and North American Indians, who of course were brought to the USA/already were here in wholly difference circumstances. Now, if you can say with a straight face that blacks and Indians today are better off than Italians or Irish, you go right ahead. Yeah, I didn’t think so. ---
**Author:** ![ShibbOleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/848f3c/32.png) [@ShibbOleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ShibbOleth)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2004, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hispanic-challenge-to-american-culture-has-samuel-huntington-gone-bonkers/235774/5 "2004-03-22T22:35:26Z")
What a load. I’m hiring people right now for a business venture, and targeting hispanics since they still do have the American dream and will work hard for a decent wage. My family on my father’s side is Mexican from a long ways back. It’s filled with entrepreneurs and no one speaks Spanish anymore, except as a second language. Maybe since we don’t have dark skin and black hair (because of years of intermarriage with other immigrant groups) I don’t fit into Huntington’s paradigm. Sounds fairly racist to me. ---
**Author:** ![Eva\_Luna](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e495f1/32.png) [@Eva\_Luna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eva_Luna)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2004, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hispanic-challenge-to-american-culture-has-samuel-huntington-gone-bonkers/235774/6 "2004-03-22T22:45:08Z")
So far the OP seems to be getting about the reception I thought it would get here. However, what creeped me out when I read the article is that Huntington is a relatively mainstream and respected historian, and some people are going to take what he says seriously, especially a) in an election year during a recession; and b) when Bush has proposed an “earned adjustment” provision which has not been spelled out in any concrete way, but which is already being slammed by immigration restrictionists as an “amnesty” which will encourage more illegal immigration and ruin the “American way of life,” whatever that even means. The more people who pick this article apart, and in the more detail, the better. I’m seriously thinking about a letter to the editor of _Foreign Policy;_ I’m all for hearing divergent viewpoints, but this one crosses the line. C’mon, give me some ammo, guys, especially you historian types! Read the whole article, and dissect it! I’ll handle the immigration side of things, but more thoughts on any angle of this whatsoever are welcome. ---
**Author:** ![syncrolecyne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f08c70/32.png) [@syncrolecyne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/syncrolecyne)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2004, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hispanic-challenge-to-american-culture-has-samuel-huntington-gone-bonkers/235774/7 "2004-03-22T22:54:42Z")
I’ll repeat things I’ve said in a dozen other posts… Other than as a bureaucratic category, there is no single “Hispanic” ethnic group. The variations between Cuban, Mexican, Dominican, Puerto Rican, or Argentine patterns of immigration are as great as those between say Ukrainians and Koreans. Also Hispanics come in nearly every color and have all sorts of individual ethnic backgrounds. Some Hispanics readily assimilate into “white” society, others might become “African-American” if they are Afro-Caribbean, others will hold on to an identity which is not easy to categorize into the American way of framing “Race”. Other than language and a broad sense of being part of some official category, there really isn’t much of a common theme. Cuban-Americans are perhaps the most Republican ethnic group in America, Puerto Ricans are among the most Democratic. Also, a large minority of Hispanics are indeed Protestant. By contrast, many so-called Anglos are Catholics. What are we to make of that? On a side note, I once did some language tutoring here in El Paso, on the Mexican border. While plenty of people here do speak only Spanish - nearly all were either born in Mexico or are elderly and grew up in a different time. The truth is most American born Hispanics speak colloquial “kitchen Spanish”, and are only fluent if they study Spanish in school or college. Many Hispanics who are third generation and beyond do not speak Spanish at all, beyond a few words and phrases - which is true of blacks and “Anglos” who live here as well. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2004, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hispanic-challenge-to-american-culture-has-samuel-huntington-gone-bonkers/235774/8 "2004-03-22T23:55:52Z")
> [@Eva Luna](#): > > However, what creeped me out when I read the article is that Huntington is a relatively mainstream and respected historian, and some people are going to take what he says seriously, especially a) in an election year during a recession; and b) when Bush has proposed an “earned adjustment” provision which has not been spelled out in any concrete way, but which is already being slammed by immigration restrictionists as an “amnesty” which will encourage more illegal immigration and ruin the “American way of life,” whatever that even means. > > The more people who pick this article apart, and in the more detail, the better. I’m seriously thinking about a letter to the editor of _Foreign Policy;_ I’m all for hearing divergent viewpoints, but this one crosses the line. Huntington is neither mainstream nor a respected historian. He’s a demagogue masquerading as a political scientist, and the basic principle underlying all his writings is “Don’t piss off Western states, because they’re _like us_, and don’t worry about the others, because they’re going to hate us anyway.” He takes a ridiculously broad-brush approach to international relations and pretty much lumps nations together based on what their people look like, what language they speak, and which god they worship. The actual history of individual nations is of little use to him. ---
**Author:** ![Atticus\_Finch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ec9cab/32.png) [@Atticus\_Finch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atticus_Finch)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2004, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hispanic-challenge-to-american-culture-has-samuel-huntington-gone-bonkers/235774/9 "2004-03-22T23:59:51Z")
I don’t think that Samuel Huntington has gone bonkers. I believe that this current work differs only in the blatancy of its racism. That is, his older work was merely more subtle or more insidious, if you’d prefer. The theory that Huntington is most famous for is that of the _Clash of Civilizations_ - that there are 8 or so “civilizations” in the world that are perpetually in conflict. In Huntington’s model, civilizations are cultural entities that are so separate from other cultural entities that their values inherently conflict. Even if this idea of a united cultural entity meant anything at all, this definition means that Huntington is saying that civilisations (cultural entities that conflict with each other) will tend to be in conflict. As a historical model, that’s like saying that a grey horse will always be some shade between black and white. The _Clash of Civilizations_ looks good at a quick glance - “So that’s why those Muslims are attacking us! They hate our values!”. Recently, it has been a convenient way for some, especially American neo-cons, to write off terrorism as being caused by an inherent conflict between the West and Islam, and therefore avoid in-depth discussion of the effect of America’s foreign policy (eg support for Israel, support for unpopular regimes). For any real historian, the _Clash of Civilisations_ is useless. To justify a glib statement by a politician to excuse something that he/she wanted to do anyway, it’s very handy. This is the background that this Hispanic scare is coming from, and this is the way in which it will be used. ([Link to the original Clash of Civilizations essay in Foreign Affairs](http://www.foreignaffairs.org/19930601faessay5188/samuel-p-huntington/the-clash-of-civilizations.html)) On preview, what **Really Not All That Bright** said. Huntington ain’t a historian. ---
**Author:** ![Eva\_Luna](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e495f1/32.png) [@Eva\_Luna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eva_Luna)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2004, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hispanic-challenge-to-american-culture-has-samuel-huntington-gone-bonkers/235774/10 "2004-03-23T00:06:37Z")
Well, the guy is a professor at Harvard and maanged to get his article into _Foerign Affairs,_ both rather mainstream institutions. So to me, for purposes of this thread he’s mainstream, no matter how wacked-out you or I think his opinions are. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2004, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hispanic-challenge-to-american-culture-has-samuel-huntington-gone-bonkers/235774/11 "2004-03-23T00:25:36Z")
> [@Eva Luna](#): > > Well, the guy is a professor at Harvard and maanged to get his article into _Foerign Affairs,_ both rather mainstream institutions. So to me, for purposes of this thread he’s mainstream, no matter how wacked-out you or I think his opinions are. He was also president of the American Political Science Association. His books (particularly the _Clash_) are also fairly commonly used in international relations and comparative politics classes at both the graduate and undergrad level. Thing is, Huntington _was_ once both relevant and mainstream… during the Cold War. Most of the people who shaped policy in those times saw the Berlin Wall come down, watched people’s revolutions overthrowing People’s Revolutions throughout Eastern Europe, and said, “Well, _this_ ought to be interesting.” Some of them decided that the end of Communism was a Bad Thing. To them, if the Russians were our _friends_, America didn’t have anybody to fight. If there was nobody to fight, the people would no longer accept military spending on the massive scale that exists in the United States- they’d expect _balanced budgets_ and _healthcare_ and all sorts of pinko ideas would take hold. So, Huntington stopped writing about the war that had ended, and started writing about the war(s) that was about to begin. All dimly imagined realities, but convincing enough that Republican brass (particularly the neo-cons; they swallow this stuff wholesale) has bought into it heavily, which is why Huntington is popular again. He isn’t _mainstream_, though. Anyone who suggests that the NATO mandate ought to be rewritten to state that the organization’s primary goal is to stop the spread of Islam is, to put it mildly, a little extreme. ---
**Author:** ![Dogface](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9d8465/32.png) [@Dogface](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dogface)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2004, 3:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hispanic-challenge-to-american-culture-has-samuel-huntington-gone-bonkers/235774/12 "2004-03-23T03:14:45Z")
Predominatly Irish ancestry here. I’ve read the “The Irish are a threat to our Anglo-Protestant culture” racist tripe while investigating the history of my ancestors in the USA. It’s just a repeat of what’s gone before. ---
**Author:** ![Zagadka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zagadka/32/7272_2.png) [@Zagadka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zagadka)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2004, 3:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hispanic-challenge-to-american-culture-has-samuel-huntington-gone-bonkers/235774/13 "2004-03-23T03:49:53Z")
I never got this. Being inter-racially hispanic myself, this clearly displays a complete lack of understanding for how hispanic culture works (not to mention the fact that practices like lumping Cubans and Puerto Ricans into one group isn’t a terribly bright idea). In my family and other hispanic families I have known, people tend to be damn hard workers, and to appreciate their American freedoms more than most Americans. The ONLY argument I’ll give much merit there is the language barrier. It is true, that many hispanics retain their ties to their cultures deeply, to the extent of practicing their language as frequently as they use English. On the flip side, I don’t know one xth-generation person who doesn’t speak perfectly fine English (usually better than most WASPs speak it). I also have never heard of one who hated America, which is just ridiculous. They may retain ties to their original heritage for some times, but as mentioned, what Irish-Americans don’t retain a bit of love for Ireland? Hispanic-American marriages aren’t even a curiosity in the southwest. Pretty bloody soon, almost everyone in California will be part hispanic. I mean, it is kinda funny - the Catholic Church is afraid of the Latin American branch of it taking over, and the Protestants are afraid of the Catholics. At one time, it was the Catholics expanding to Latin America, and the Catholics afraid of the Protestants. Go figure. If they are really so terribly afraid, these hate-mongers should be looking at doing what they can to make the Latin American nations in their backyard more stable and less corrupt… little things like- well, that is off topic, and considering the folk terrified of NAFTA… I guess some people are perfectly OK with us being gardeners and maids, though. ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2004, 10:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hispanic-challenge-to-american-culture-has-samuel-huntington-gone-bonkers/235774/14 "2004-03-23T10:52:53Z")
Debunking chunks from the OP’s article, as per Eva’s request. > [@](#): > > America was created by 17th- and 18th-century settlers… I’m flashing on that t-shirt/coffee mug from the 1970s that said, “Be Patient–God’s Not Finished With Me Yet”. America isn’t finished yet. Any halfway sensible person would realize that the process of “creating America” may be said to be still under way. America wasn’t “created”, poof!, like that, in the 17th and 18th century, and then has been preserved intact ever since, like a museum exhibit, like something at Colonial Williamsburg. No, it’s been evolving steadily, and will continue to evolve. That’s what cultures do. And anyone who styles himself a “historian” ought to know that. > [@](#): > > the Declaration of Independence, and ever since, its principles have been reiterated by statesmen and espoused by the public as an essential component of U.S. identity Sure. It’s an essential component of U.S. identity. No argument there. But what part of it is not applicable to non-white, non-Protestant people? It’s applicable to _Americans_, period. > [@](#): > > With World War II and the assimilation of large numbers of southern and eastern European immigrants and their offspring into U.S. society, ethnicity virtually disappeared as a defining component of national identity. So did race, following the achievements of the civil rights movement and the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. Americans now see and endorse their country as multiethnic and multiracial. As a result, American identity is now defined in terms of culture and creed. Kind of contradictory. He’s saying that ethnicity disappeared, but that Americans endorse ethnicity? > [@](#): > > Contributions from immigrant cultures modified and enriched the Anglo-Protestant culture of the founding settlers. Yes. But he doesn’t seem to realize, or appreciate, that contributions from Hispanic culture are also, even as we speak, modifying, and enriching today’s American culture. [scrolling through article] And all of a sudden, wham!, we’re into the standard anti-immigration party line, familiar to me from any of a number of anti-immigration websites I’ve browsed over the years, thanks to various GD threads. At least he had the courtesy to put it into his own words, he didn’t just blatantly Copy and Paste it from somebody’s Geocities web page… > [@](#): > > \*In the final decades of the 20th century, however, the United States’ Anglo-Protestant culture and the creed that it produced came under assault by the popularity in intellectual and political circles of the doctrines of multiculturalism and diversity; the rise of group identities based on race, ethnicity, and gender over national identity; the impact of transnational cultural diasporas; the expanding number of immigrants with dual nationalities and dual loyalties; and the growing salience for U.S. intellectual, business, and political elites of cosmopolitan and transnational identities. The United States’ national identity, like that of other nation-states, is challenged by the forces of globalization as well as the needs that globalization produces among people for smaller and more meaningful “blood and belief” identities. > > In this new era, the single most immediate and most serious challenge to America’s traditional identity comes from the immense and continuing immigration from Latin America, especially from Mexico, and the fertility rates of these immigrants compared to black and white American natives…\* Blah, blah, blah…The whole article from here on is just standard “They’re a-comin! And they’re a-gonna take over!” anti-immigration racist hatemongering, right down to the “They’re gonna make **us** all learn to speak **their** language!” and the repeated references to “their” high birth rate. And given his overwhelming and blatant specifically anti-Mexican bias (which is also pretty standard for this kind of thing–it’s always the Evil Mexican Wetbacks who are a-gonna take over, never the Evil Guatamalans or the Evil Salvadorans or the Evil Dominicans or the Evil Puerto Ricans), I’m surprised he hasn’t mentioned “Aztlan will rise and overwhelm us!” :rolleyes: Eva, you know, there’s not a lot here that you can seriously debunk, especially in print. It’s all just smoke and mirrors, empty rhetoric, playing on people’s secret fears. Statements like this… > [@](#): > > Most immigrant groups have higher fertility rates than natives …are extremely vague on purpose, and are hard to pin down. He quotes this guy: > [@](#): > > “Unlike other immigrants,” Boston College political scientist Peter Skerry notes, “Mexicans arrive here from a neighboring nation that has suffered military defeat at the hands of the United States; and they settle predominantly in a region that was once part of their homeland…. Mexican Americans enjoy a sense of being on their own turf that is not shared by other immigrants.” Which is interesting, given [this other quote](http://www.city-journal.org/dev/html/3_4_precis.html) from Skerry: > [@](#): > > _Peter Skerry teaches political science at UCLA. Here be gives a synopsis of his book, Mexican Americans: The Ambivalent Minority, The Free Press, nominated for the 1993 Los Angeles Times Book Critics Circle Award._ > > After years of indifference, Americans have recently become concerned about the millions of immigrants flooding into their cities. Newcomers from Mexico are one of the largest and most visible immigrant groups. Reacting to the clamor for Spanish-language ballots and bilingual education, many fear that this growing population cannot or will not assimilate into the mainstream of American life. In Mexican Americans: The Ambivalent Minority, I argue that such fears are largely misplaced and that Mexican immigrants and their offspring will, as they have in the past, learn English, gradually move up the social and economic ladder, and sing the national anthem at Dodger Stadium. > > Nonetheless, there is reason to be concerned that, having joined the mainstream, Mexican Americans will see themselves not as individual citizens but as members of a group deserving special treatment and protection. Although they are learning English, for instance, Mexican Americans may still demand special rights for Spanish. The critical question, therefore, is not whether Mexican Americans will assimilate, but how—on what terms. Interesting, and pretty standard, technique of cherry-picking the quote you want to reinforce your own argument. Find a guy who said something that you agree with, take his quote (almost certainly) out of context, and ignore the fact that actually he’s pretty much on the opposite side, the side of the level-headed people who can be sensible about the inarguably rising numbers of Mexican-Americans. Huntington’s whole point is that the Hispanics are not assimilating, that they’re going to form some kind of ethnic bloc and “do things their own way” and control American culture. However, his own statistics contradict this: > [@](#): > > An earlier study in Los Angeles found different results for the U.S.-born second generation. Just 11.6 percent spoke only Spanish or more Spanish than English, 25.6 percent spoke both languages equally, 32.7 percent more English than Spanish, and 30.1 percent only English. In the same study, more than 90 percent of the U.S.-born people of Mexican origin spoke English fluently. They sound pretty assimilated to me. Later…[composing this in WordPad as I read through the article] Oh, for heaven’s sake, he IS going to mention “Aztlan”, on Page 6, although apparently not in so many words. [insert large economy-sized rolleyes emoticon] > [@](#): > > Demographically, socially, and culturally, the reconquista (re-conquest) of the Southwest United States by Mexican immigrants is well underway. A meaningful move to reunite these territories with Mexico seems unlikely, but Prof. Charles Truxillo of the University of New Mexico predicts that by 2080 the southwestern states of the United States and the northern states of Mexico will form La República del Norte (The Republic of the North). Various writers have referred to the southwestern United States plus northern Mexico as “MexAmerica” or “Amexica” or “Mexifornia.” “We are all Mexicans in this valley,” a former county commissioner of El Paso, Texas, declared in 2001. > > This trend could consolidate the Mexican-dominant areas of the United States into an autonomous, culturally and linguistically distinct, and economically self-reliant bloc within the United States. “We may be building toward the one thing that will choke the melting pot,” warns former National Intelligence Council Vice Chairman Graham Fuller, “an ethnic area and grouping so concentrated that it will not wish, or need, to undergo assimilation into the mainstream of American multi-ethnic English-speaking life.” And again, in his haste to prove his “they’re taking over!” point, he shoots himself in the foot. > [@](#): > > The Cuban takeover had major consequences for Miami…Today, the Cubans can legitimately claim that, in the words of Prof. Damian Fernández of Florida International University, “We built modern Miami,” and made its economy larger than those of many Latin American countries. Yep, those Hispanics sure did build a booming economy in Miami. And–this is a _bad_ thing?? Is the money only good if WASPs earn it? Their tax dollars went to fix roads and pay for state police in places like Jacksonville and Tallahassee, ya know. And typically, parts of this are just stupid: > [@](#): > > The Cuban and Hispanic dominance of Miami left Anglos (as well as blacks) as outside minorities that could often be ignored. Unable to communicate with government bureaucrats and discriminated against by store clerks, the Anglos came to realize, as one of them put it, “My God, this is what it’s like to be the minority.” " :rolleyes: " More standard anti-immigration party line appears on Page 7: “The Mexican government is actually _encouraging_ the evil wetbacks to invade us.” > [@](#): > > Since the 1980s, however, the Mexican government has sought to expand the numbers, wealth, and political power of the Mexican community in the U.S. Southwest and to integrate that population with Mexico. “The Mexican nation extends beyond the territory enclosed by its borders,” Mexican President Ernesto Zedillo said in the 1990s. His successor, Vicente Fox, called Mexican emigrants “heroes” and describes himself as president of 123 million Mexicans, 100 million in Mexico and 23 million in the United States. This is tiresome. Also, that Zedillo quote **IS** posted on every anti-immigration website you can find on Google. So you may consider it proven, if there was still any doubt in your mind, that Samuel P. Huntington is squarely on the side of the racists. “Lazy Mexicans” (“they don’t really want to work”) appear, predictably enough. On page 8. > [@](#): > > Castañeda cited differences in social and economic equality, the unpredictability of events, concepts of time epitomized in the mañana syndrome, the ability to achieve results quickly, and attitudes toward history, expressed in the “cliché that Mexicans are obsessed with history, Americans with the future.” Sosa identifies several Hispanic traits (very different from Anglo-Protestant ones) that “hold us Latinos back”: mistrust of people outside the family; lack of initiative, self-reliance, and ambition; little use for education; and acceptance of poverty as a virtue necessary for entrance into heaven. Author Robert Kaplan quotes Alex Villa, a third-generation Mexican American in Tucson, Arizona, as saying that he knows almost no one in the Mexican community of South Tucson who believes in “education and hard work” as the way to material prosperity and is thus willing to “buy into America.” [sigh] And there are the same tables of statistics at the end, starting on Page 10, purporting to _prove_ how fertile, poor, and uneducated those Evil Mexicans are. Why, they can’t even manage to buy their own homes! :rolleyes: Of course, halfway sensible people know there are good reasons for these numbers, and that you can use statistics to prove anything you want to. And the use of outdated statistics to turn up the emotional heat is a classic technique: > [@](#): > > One index foretells the future: In 1998, “José” replaced “Michael” as the most popular name for newborn boys in both California and Texas. Yes, but by 2002, “Jose” had dropped to #3, being ousted by “Daniel” and “Anthony”. [http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/babynames/2002/top5\_male\_bystate\_2002.html](http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/babynames/2002/top5_male_bystate_2002.html) And finally, the use of Hollywood imagery to inflame. Never mind that it’s “fiction”. On page 12: > [@](#): > > In the 1993 film Falling Down, Michael Douglas plays a white former defense company employee reacting to the humiliations that he sees imposed on him by a multicultural society. Yes, Michael Douglas went on a killing spree–all because of those Evil Mexicans! And, oh lord preserve us, there’s even a plug for the White Nationalists tacked onto the very end. > [@](#): > > "Cultured, intelligent, and often possessing impressive degrees from some of America’s premier colleges and universities, this new breed of white racial advocate is a far cry from the populist politicians and hooded Klansmen of the Old South,” writes Carol Swain in her 2002 book, The New White Nationalism in America. These new white nationalists do not advocate white racial supremacy but believe in racial self-preservation and affirm that culture is a product of race. They contend that the shifting U.S. demographics foretell the replacement of white culture by black or brown cultures that are intellectually and morally inferior. > > \< snip \> > > Today, white nativists could well ask: If blacks and Hispanics organize and lobby for special privileges, why not whites? If the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and the National Council of La Raza are legitimate organizations, why not a national organization promoting white interests? > White nationalism is “the next logical stage for identity politics in America,” argues Swain, making the United States “increasingly at risk of large-scale racial conflict unprecedented in our nation’s history.” The most powerful stimulus to such white nativism will be the cultural and linguistic threats whites see from the expanding power of Hispanics in U.S. society. 'Bout as subtle as a brick. Eva, don’t waste your time trying to address this. Everybody recognizes it for what it is–a lot of standard anti-immigration racist claptrap. If it’s any consolation, you’re not the first one to notice. [http://chronicle.com/cgi2-bin/printable.cgi?article=http://chronicle.com/prm/daily/2004/02/2004022401n.htm](http://chronicle.com/cgi2-bin/printable.cgi?article=http://chronicle.com/prm/daily/2004/02/2004022401n.htm) > [@](#): > > Tuesday, February 24, 2004 > > Critics Assail Scholar’s Article Arguing That Hispanic Immigration Threatens U.S. > By DAVID GLENN > > High levels of Hispanic immigration threaten to disrupt the political and cultural integrity of the United States, according to a controversial new article by the political scientist Samuel P. Huntington, who is the chairman of Harvard University’s Academy for International and Area Studies. > > In the essay, which will be published next week in the March/April issue of Foreign Policy magazine, Mr. Huntington warns that the United States faces the loss of its “core Anglo-Protestant culture” and may soon be divided into “two peoples with two cultures (Anglo and Hispanic) and two languages (English and Spanish).” > > A leaked copy of the article began to circulate among scholars on Monday and immediately drew heated criticism… Oh, and…P.S. > [@](#): > > **managed to get his article into Foreign Affairs** Which was back in 1993. 😉 Maybe back in 1993 he wasn’t such an overt racist. So the fact that they published his article back then doesn’t really prove anything vis-a-vis his credibility or credentials today. ---
**Author:** ![Eva\_Luna](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e495f1/32.png) [@Eva\_Luna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eva_Luna)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2004, 12:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hispanic-challenge-to-american-culture-has-samuel-huntington-gone-bonkers/235774/15 "2004-03-23T12:52:43Z")
**DDG,** more later, after I caffeinate myself and get to work, but he got it into _Foreign Affairs_ both in 1993 and this month. And as others have mentioned, the current article is, if anything, more extreme. The guy seems to need to find enemies. If he’s feeling nostalgic for the Cold War and wanted to stick with the Russians, there’s still plenty of stuff he could pick on Russia for; why does he feel this driving need to pick on the Mexicans? Oh yeah, they’re generally browner than Russians. Probably nobody would print a letter to the editor from little old me; _Foreign Affairs_ tends to print letters only from tenured professors at the very least, which I’m certainly not. And the thought did cross my mind that they printed the article purely to discredit Huntington; it’s so far beyond anything they normally print that I was shocked. Yep, his agenda is pretty transparent, but let’s face it; a certain sector of society actually _believes_ that stuff. ---
**Author:** ![IzzyR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/2acd7d/32.png) [@IzzyR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IzzyR)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2004, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hispanic-challenge-to-american-culture-has-samuel-huntington-gone-bonkers/235774/16 "2004-03-23T15:00:45Z")
(Opening caveat: I’ve not read the article linked in the OP). One possible difference between Hispanics and other past immigrant groups is the percentage of the population that they form. I’m not sure if there was ever a non-English speaking group that formed such a large (and growing) percentage of the population. The practical impact of this is that American society has had to accommodate itself to the Spanish language in ways that it likely has not had to do for other languages. (An example is the recorded phone messages that tend to give the option of English or Spanish). This, in turn, has lessened the degree that Spanish people need to assimilate to the larger society. It is also possible that as society has moved to confront the evils of racism, there has been a lessening of an emphasis on assimilation, and a move to accommodate those of other cultures, and indeed to celebrate those cultures as examples of diversity. This has positive aspects, of course, but it also likely contributes to the lessening of the pressure on immigrants to assimilate. For these reasons, the cites (and anecdotes) that some posters have posted on language assimilation are not conclusive. It is very possible that for earlier generations of Spanish immigrants, who immigrated at a time when the Spanish presence was much smaller, and societal attitudes different, assimilation and integration was a much higher priority than it is today. And of course, language assimilation is the key to integration. I have no idea what “Hispanic values” might be, or whether they are the same as or different from those of other Americans etc. etc. But what I do know is that different cultures do exist in the world, and when people are confronted by those of another culture, all sorts of tension can sometimes exist, not to mention xenophobia. And if there’s one factor that allows for the development of different cultures among people in close proximity it is the speaking of different languages. Since the Hispanic proportion of the population is continuing to grow, this problem, to the extent that it exists, will only get worse for the foreseeable future. I don’t think the sky is falling in just yet, but it is a legitimate concern, that does not deserve to be drowned out by shouts of racism. ---
**Author:** ![Eva\_Luna](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e495f1/32.png) [@Eva\_Luna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eva_Luna)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2004, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hispanic-challenge-to-american-culture-has-samuel-huntington-gone-bonkers/235774/17 "2004-03-23T15:24:53Z")
> [@IzzyR](#): > > (Opening caveat: I’ve not read the article linked in the OP). > > [snip] > > I don’t think the sky is falling in just yet, but it is a legitimate concern, that does not deserve to be drowned out by shouts of racism. **IzzyR,** I highly recommend that you read the entire article. It goes far past, say, bemoaning excess expenditures on less-than-effective bilingual education programs; it basically says that Hispanic culture (whatever that even means; as others have already mentioned, there is a whole spectrum of cultures which might be labeled “Hispanic”) is incompatible with assimilation into American society without swallowing it whole. ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2004, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hispanic-challenge-to-american-culture-has-samuel-huntington-gone-bonkers/235774/18 "2004-03-23T15:34:24Z")
> [@IzzyR](#): > > Since the Hispanic proportion of the population is continuing to grow, this problem, to the extent that it exists, will only get worse for the foreseeable future. I don’t think the sky is falling in just yet, but it is a legitimate concern, that does not deserve to be drowned out by shouts of racism. So you do believe it _is_ a problem? Can you please explain _why_ it is a problem? Can you define what is the “problem” and its nature? And can you please explain _why_ you believe the issue should not be drowned out by shouts of racism? ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2004, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hispanic-challenge-to-american-culture-has-samuel-huntington-gone-bonkers/235774/19 "2004-03-23T15:56:32Z")
However, **IzzyR** , Huntington damages his own position by incorporating into his article elements of various “sky-is-falling” scenarios that seem lifted right out of “nativist” writings. Provocation makes it harder to address the underlying facts seriously and impartially. It’s one thing to recognize straightforward facts, such as that “Hispanics” are one-eight of the population and growing and have required more _ostensible_ “accommodation” than other waves, and another to reach his conclusions and make predictiosn that are so dire. Heck, to begin with, “Hispanic” is an arbitrary classification that need not correlate to being a component of that “danger”: it includes millions of people who ARE fully assimilated into the American mainstream and live according to “American values” but just happen to have latino “roots”. Plus he does seem a bit too focused on Mexicans (Leading to a suspicion that he may be experiencing _“white guilt”_, thinking they are just waiting for payback for 1848). And the parallel implication that catholic:protestant maps to un-american:american leaves a foul taste in the mouth. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2004, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hispanic-challenge-to-american-culture-has-samuel-huntington-gone-bonkers/235774/20 "2004-03-23T16:01:04Z")
> [@JRDelirious](#): > > And the parallel implication that catholic:protestant maps to un-american:american leaves a foul taste in the mouth. Or even Catholic:Protestant… :o [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hispanic-challenge-to-american-culture-has-samuel-huntington-gone-bonkers/235774.md?page=2)