Hispanic Is Not a Race (Short Version) The Ford Foundation and Chicanos

If you believe that Latino is a race you will likely be surprised that there is only one country in the world where Latino is considered a race or an ethnicity, the United States. None of the  countries from which “Latinos” come from, have that option in their census, instead they have the traditional races of White, Amerindian, Black, Asian. This article is the story of how that came to be, a process I will call Latinoization and its consequences.

The 1960s were a time of great change and unrest in the United States. In this atmosphere some members of the Mexican American population became politicized and sought to organize themselves. Their situation was bad, but not as bad as blacks. Mexicans were considered officially white, although most are mestizos (White-Amerindian). Their communities were poorly provided with public services, and they were barred from many areas. There were signs reading “No Spanish or Mexicans”. Interesting to note that Spaniards weren’t considered white, Italians weren’t also considered white in the past, and even the Irish isolated in Northwestern Europe weren’t considered white for a while. These examples show how Race has been previously manipulated for political purposes.

During this period there arose organizations that today are the most prominent  “Latino” advocacy groups these are the NCLR, MALDEF, and LatinoJustice. But this is not all that they have in common, they all received funding from the Ford Foundation. Maldef received 2.2 million dollars in seed funding from the Ford Foundation. (3) For the NCLR, “Initial financial support came from the Council of Churches, the United Auto Workers, and a Ford Foundation planning grant, and by April of that year SWCLR had received its 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status.” (4) It is unclear if the Ford Foundation played a similar role in the creation of LatinoJusticePRLDEF, however one of its founders Cesar A. Perales had previously worked for the Ford Foundation. (5) Perhaps the most important part of being “Latino” is receiving cheques from the Ford Foundation. Other establishment liberal foundations like the Rockefeller Foundation and the Carnegie Corporation also fund these same advocacy groups.

The Foundations have been more important in creating the “Latino” race, than the activists who provided them with the ideology. They have funded various types of “Latino” groups, in fields as varied as politics, ethnic research centers, arts, and culture, and so on. I am tempted to label this the greatest astroturfing effort of all time. The Ford Foundation is essential to this story which is why I dub them with honorary title “Father of all Latinos”. Without the resources that the foundation patrons provided, “Latino” leaders and their ideology, would not have gained their present prominence. Here are some recent statistics; The Ford Foundation has for the period (2007-2011) given MALDEF $6,350,000, LatinoJustice: $4,479,800, and NCLR: $5,575,600 (2007-2011). The Carnegie Corporation has given MALDEF: $5,555,400 (1983-2009), NCLR: $2,614,000 (1986-2008), and LatinoJustice: $3,290,000 (1983-2007).  The Rockefeller Foundation has given the NCLR: $1,510,000 (2006-2011) and MALDEF: $250,000 (2007), LatinoJustice $150,000 (2005-2006).  (17, 18, 19)These groups specially the NCLR sought to broaden its base to include all people from Latin America, by claiming to represent all these groups, the leaders could increase their power. (6)

These generally left leaning advocacy groups were able to come into prominence because they were backed by powerful liberal foundations. No one backed the radical Chicanos or right wing White Cuban exiles and made them spokesmen for all the rest. The particular ideology of NCLR and the like, is illustrated in this quote, “The term was coined by Mexican scholar José Vasconcelos to reflect the fact that the people of Latin America are a mixture of many of the world’s races, cultures, and religions.  Some people have mistranslated “La Raza” to mean “the race,” implying that it is a term meant to exclude others. In fact, the full term coined by Vasconcelos, “la raza cósmica,” meaning “the cosmic people,” was developed to reflect not purity but the mixture inherent in the Hispanic people.” (7)  Vasconcelos hadn’t come to this conclusion after analyzing years of painstaking research by physical anthropologists, it was a myth that he had created to forcefully homogenize Mexico, and to be instituted through government propaganda and coercion. In 1921 the last time the Mexican government bothered to ask the people of Mexico their race their answers were 29.16% amerindian, 59.33% Mestizo, and 9.80% White, 1.00% other. (8) According to the NCLR 38.96% of the Mexican population does not have the intelligence necessary to look in to a mirror, and realize the mixture inherent in the “Hispanic” race. Their claim that to know the genealogy of every inhabitant of Latin America can be described as nothing but extreme arrogance.

Obviously this ideology is not widespread throughout Latin America, it’s not even true for Mexico, or how would one explain something like the Caste war of Yucatan. Nevertheless it is the ideology that has been imposed on all people that come from Latin America, and even those from Iberia. There was no plebiscite, in which all those who would be affected, gave their ascent to this policy. Instead it was the force of government, that stepped in on behalf of these advocacy groups, and made Latinoization official government policy. In 1976 with Public law 94-311, the first step was taken. In 1977 with OMB directive no. 15, the “Latino race”, became official U.S. Policy.  Albeit the government says that “Latinos” can be of any race, and that it’s an “ethnicity”.(9) However then they proceed to treat it as a race for all practical intents and purposes. If the criteria that makes someone a Latino/Hispanic is valid, than it should be universally valid. Thus anyone coming from an English speaking country, regardless of race, would be an Anglo, there can even be Black Anglos like Martin Luther King. This would obscure the huge differences that exist in the different groups living in English Speaking countries, thus this criteria is not valid.

I have concluded that this was done on behalf of these lobbying organizations because the sponsors of these bills were Democrats. The main sponsor was Rep Roybal, Edward R. who helped found both NALEO and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, which share the same  “Latino” ideology. (10) (11)

 The government, and civil organizations, are important, but without prestigious universities and their experts a “Latino” race would still be impossible. It was therefore necessary to create experts, foremost among these efforts was the Inter-University Program for Latino Research which was also funded by the Ford Foundation. “It represented a response to the rapid growth of the Latino population in the early 1980s and what a Ford Foundation working paper stressed as the need of policymakers and of Latinos themselves for “greater knowledge and understanding of their economic, social and political situation and of the roots of their disadvantage, and the development of an infrastructure that will increase their participation in the mainstream society.” (15) The Carnegie Corporation and Rockefeller Foundation were also generous contributors to this effort.(16) Again it seems that these “Latinos” are incapable of having any basic knowledge of themselves. Thankfully the gringos at the Ford Foundation and people that hard really no experience living in Latin America would teach these unenlightened “Latinos” how they found themselves in such a sorry state.

The IUPLR, “..found very few comparative studies among Latino groups or between Latinos and other groups of Americans, and a minimal understanding of Latinos within the public policy arena.” (15) This was such thing does not exist. However soon the IUPLR got to work “For the first time experienced professors and young researchers from member centers and other institutions nationwide came together specifically to identify major gaps in Latino-focused research and to plan systematic, collaborative research to fill these gaps. The groups organized themselves around specific policy-relevant topic areas and began developing research agendas, raising funds, and collaboratively investigating these topics at the regional, national, and international levels. In most cases one of the member centers served as the lead site.” (15) Filling gaps or in other words, falsifying history. These men rewrote history on behalf of their foundation and advocacy group patrons, writing in “Latinos” wherever they thought it convenient. This new history was then taught in the research centers, and from there filtered on throughout the whole educational system, remember books can be rewritten from one year to the next.

Lastly if people ignore the obvious physical differences between “Latino” individuals, if they see black, brown, and white but believe them the same because the government says so, it is hard to have much confidence in the abilities of the general populace to resist the most ridiculous propaganda. The ease in which public opinion can be manipulated does not bode well for our democracy.

Sources;

2. http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/00W/chicano101-1/aztlan.htm (El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan)

3. http://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/jom01 (MALDEF established with Ford Foundation Funding)

4. http://www.nclr.org/index.php/about_us/history/formation_of_the_southwest_council_of_la_raza/  (Ford Funding)

5. http://latinojustice.org/briefing_room/press_releases/Perales_steps_down/

6. http://www.hispanicbusiness.com/news/news_print.asp?id=18351

7. http://www.nclr.org/index.php/about_us/faqs/general_faqs_and_requested_resources/

8. http://www.inegi.org.mx/sistemas/TabuladosBasicos/default.aspx?c=16768&s=est (Razas)

9. Ruben G. Rumbaut Ph.D. Brandeis University The Making of a people (2006)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK19896/

10. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d094:HJ00092:@@@P|TOM:/bss/d094query.html|

11. http://www.naleo.org/history.html (Edward R. Roybal founded Naleo and Hispanic Caucus.)

12. An outline of Intellectual Rubbish (1943) Bertrand Russell

13.http://www.allgov.com/ViewNews/Ambassador_to_Dominican_Republic__Who_is_Raul_Yzaguirre_100711

14. http://www.columbia.edu/cu/polisci/fac-bios/de-la-Garza/faculty.html

15.http://iuplr.nd.edu/about/history.php (“education”)

16. http://iuplr.nd.edu/about/chron_history.php

17http://www.fordfoundation.org/grants/search

18http://carnegie.org/grants/grants-database/

19http://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/grants

Sustainability is Overrated

It has come to be believed that sustainability is an intrinsically good thing and that we should reorganize our economy around sustainable energy sources and exploit resources sustainably.

First of all it is thanks to our unsustainable energy sources that we have achieved our current standard living standard, it is coal and oil that enabled the industrial and agricultural revolutions. Without these resources we would have to go back to the 18th century. Billions of people are alive due to these unsustainable resources.

World population booms when coal and oil come to be widely used as energy resources.

Yes eventually they will run out, and if they are not replaced, then many people will die, but isn’t it better to have lived and lost then to not have lived at all.

A short list of other unsustainable activities.

Life : all organisms that have lived have died, species have gone extinct.

Sex: LOL

Our Solar System: eventually the sun will explode wiping out all traces of our existence, so much for solar energy.

I guess these should be phased out too.

Interested in Humans? Read these books!!

You are probably surrounded by humans everywhere you go. These peculiar creatures can sometimes cause us great pain, yet other times they are a source of great joy. Even if you don’t particularly enjoy their company, it would be convenient to know why they behave in such strange ways (funny pic). Humans are quite numerous and they have spread throughout the world, pushing weaker species out of the way. Thus comprehending them is a worthwhile task, these books will help you do it, and you can even test what you learn on local specimens.

Consilience- This book argues for the unity of science, and its universal applicability. It’s a continuation of the “controversy” generated by E.O. Wilson’s book Sociobiology, which started the trend of merging the social sciences with biology. Unlike other “real scientists” E.O. Wilson shows a great appreciation for the social sciences which he says are the real hard sciences.

Homicide- by Wilson and Daly, uses an evolutionary perspective to analyze homicide. The authors conclude that violence and the threat of violence are used by young males to move up the social hierarchy, compete for limited resources (females), and intangible assets like reputation. This is especially true in places without a strong central authority, in which one may outsource revenge.

Collapse of Complex Societies- by Joseph Tainter. This book argues that societies increase in complexity and size trying to solve problems with greater levels of organization. Tainter masterfully uses the concept of diminishing returns to explain how agriculture and other lower levels of organization produce great returns, allowing for lager population and more complexity. Eventually however a point is reached, where politicians try to solve real or imagined problems by creating bureaucracies that cost more than the value they produce, eventually complexity is diminished to a more sustainable level. The U.S. seems to be at this point, i.e. the abomination that is the TSA.  Tainter has little patience with unscientific ideas about decadence, one should only talk about things that can be measured empirically.

The Blank Slate- by Steven PInker. This book argues that our brain has been shaped by millions of years by natural selection, and thus comes with pre-adaptations. For example the ease with which children learn language compared to the difficulty of learning math. The brain has certain biases, and specialized processing centers which shape how we view the world.

Evolutionary Psychology-by Steven Gaulin and Donald Mc. Burney, this is an overview of evolutionary psychology. Talks about sexual selection, how women are interested more in man’s resources while men are interested in women’s physical appearance.  Explains the concepts of exclusive fitness (why you care about family), why the blanks slate theory is wrong. Mostly an overview of this exciting field.

Not by Genes Alone- by Peter J Richerson and Robert Boyd. Argues for the importance of culture, most of the progress made in the last 10,000 years has been because of culture not evolution. However culture also evolves and builds upon itself, it is necessary to have invented the wheel before the car, etc.  Explains things that are obviously maladaptive through a cultural lens, like mountain hiking.

Guns Don’t Kill People; People Kill People

People used stone tools to kill people.

People used spears to kill people.

People used bows to kill people.

People used slings to kill people.

People used horses, elephants, dogs, etc to kill people.

People used swords to kill people.

People used crossbows to kill people.

People used poison to kill people.

And finally:

People used guns to kill people.

Notice the common variable here is people not guns.

Lastly guns are illegal in neighboring Mexico, and that’s why criminals run amok when law abiding citizens can’t defend themselves. So gun ownership is not a panacea for peace.

Creating Muslims

“Only after 9/11, and subsequent terrorist attacks in Europe, did researchers start calling them “Muslims”. Instead of national origins, or social class, suddenly only religion mattered. This was true even if the “Muslims” didn’t have any religion.”

“Of course, if politicians, media and researchers keep telling nominal Muslims that they are “Muslims”, that that is their prime identity, and that they are unlike everyone else, then these people will tend to start thinking of themselves as “Muslims”. That has happened in Europe and the US. This is good news for a small set of professional Muslims, who proclaim themselves leaders of the nonexistent “Muslim community” and then “build bridges” with other “communities”.”

From an article by Simon Kuper for the Financial Times Magazine read it here.

Sound familiar. The politicians who control the apparatus of power create or exaggerate an “impending threat” in order to keep or expand their power. Thus people that may or may not have anything in common are presented as a unified and monolithic threat.

By constantly repeating the term of muslim in the media and government forms, a technique known as the Big Lie, most of the people who are labeled as such come to think of themselves as such. Those who refuse are silenced and marginalized. They are not invited on the TV shows, there opinions are not published by the newspapers, they don’t receive government funding.

Some unprincipled individuals proclaim themselves leaders of the nonexistent community, seeking fame and wealth, and these are invited as representatives by the powers that be. Government Largesse is directed at the nonexistent community, a lot of which is siphoned off for personal use by the “leaders”.  An example of this is the government funding of Imans in Europe.

This is quite similar to the attempted creation of “Latinos” in the U.S. which I wrote about in great depth here.

America Now A Plutocracy, says FT

“First, the great American middle class is in long-term crisis. Most people cannot get secure, well-paid jobs any longer. The top 1 per cent captured 93 per cent of the income gains in 2010. The remaining 99 per cent were either treading water or seeing falling incomes. This includes those with an undergraduate or vocational degree, whose incomes have not budged in real terms since 2001. Only postgraduates and those with PhDs have seen income growth since then. Income mobility, once America’s greatest exception, is now wallowing at sub-European levels.

America now boasts of an unmatched plutocracy – or what one observer dubbed a “plutonomy”, given the growing role billionaires play in politics. Below them is an increasingly large floating world of the former and semi-middle class, who have lost the security their parents once had.”

From an article by Edward Luce for the Financial Times Weekend Magazine.

This all may be true hasn’t it always been this way, decisions are always made by a miniscule elite. At the beginning of the Republic only wealthy white men had the right to vote. Decisions are made by a small number, one President, 9 Supreme Court Justices, two Senators for each state, and a proportional representation in the House of Representatives.  Capital is concentrated in the hands of the few, while most have to labor for subsistence.

Before it was argued that it was impossible to gather the masses in one place for them to make decisions, now however there is no practical reason for the masses not to make all political decisions. The technology is present just like people vote for their favorite singers in American Idol so the could vote for or against any piece of legislation.

However that would certainly be worst than our current system. Hierarchy is a defining characteristic of civilization. Every state level society has been ruled by an Oligarchy, of course there are differences in the composition of the oligarchy; Bureaucrats, Landowners, Manufacturers, Financiers, etc. But these differences don’t change the structure of society.

The Basic Facts of The Universe

1. Materialism: Everything consists of matter. There are no supernatural or nonmaterial entities. No mind-body divide, you are your brain.

2. Determinism: Since everything consists of matter, and matter is subject to various laws, like it is neither created nor destroyed. The laws of physics are exemplary. Chance does not exist, we simply don’t know and probably can’t know all the variables that would allow us to determine the future. Everything could be broken dow into mathematical calculations were it not for the world’s complexity.

This position more or less goes back to the ancient Greek and Roman atomists; Democritus, Epicurus, and Lucretius. It has always been a minority position. The vast majority of people have always and everywhere believed some superstition.

Now you don’t have to waste 4 years in College learning Philosophy.  Yes, your welcome.

 

Inflation and Bubbles

Inflation doesn’t have to be tracked in the CPI (Consumers Price Index), it all depends on where the money created is allocated. At least that’s the point made by Dylan Grice from Soc Gen.

Read more here.

The Free Market is Still The Best

Due to the current economic crisis a lot of people have questioned wether Capitalism is still the best economic system, or wether it is heading for failure. However the basic facts haven’t changed countries that allow freer markets are much wealthier than those that favor state control.

According to this ranking on the ease of Doing Business (how free the market is) conducted by the International Finance Corporation and the World Bank, these are the five best countries. They are also among the wealthiest countries.

Ease of Doing Business Rank ▲	Starting a Business	Dealing with Construction Permits	Getting Electricity	Registering Property	Getting Credit	Protecting Investors	Paying Taxes	Trading Across Borders	Enforcing Contracts	Resolving Insolvency
Singapore	1	4	3	5	14	8	2	4	1	12	2
Hong Kong SAR, China	2	5	1	4	57	4	3	3	2	5	16
New Zealand	3	1	2	31	3	4	1	36	27	10	18
United States	4	13	17	17	16	4	5	72	20	7	15
Denmark	5	31	10	13	11	24	29	14	7	32	9

The 5 Worst; among the poorest countries in the world.

Guinea	179	181	174	119	152	150	174	176	130	127	130
Eritrea	180	182	183	96	178	177	111	121	165	47	183
Congo, Rep.	181	175	103	152	156	98	155	182	181	159	134
Central African Republic	182	160	136	162	132	98	133	177	182	173	183
Chad	183	183	122	117	143	98	155	180	178	163	183

Inequality

The U.S. is the second worst of industrialized countries after Singapore. Scandinavians are the most egalitarian countries. These countries are also relatively homogeneous.

The most unequal countries are in the so called “third world”, and are racially diverse. The three most unequal countries on the chart are South Africa, Peru, and Brazil. All three of these countries have a white elite, and a non white majority that is extremely poor.  South Africa has a white (English, Afrikaners) minority and a Black majority. In Peru the elite is descended from the Spanish Conquistadors and sees no incentive to share the wealth, when some Amerindian leaders say Whites should all be exterminated. In Brazil Whites recently became a minority, the rest of the population is made up of Mulattos, Blacks, and Amerindians.

It appears that in-group bias is a powerful force for inequality. As the U.S. continues to become more diverse it appears that it is destined to become more unequal.