Immigration

[magerette]

Back when they were stinking deserts populated by hostile Native American tribes, scorpions and rattlesnakes...there's a bit more out there now, though I'm not sure if it's an improvement.

 

[Prime Junta]

But the fer'ner is such a smartass...

You didn't quote what I thought was the most damning part of Hulk's extensive post.

"What happened next "put me over the edge," she said. "Eighty percent of the stadium wouldn't stand. They were Hispanic children, and they didn't stand for the national anthem ," I asked them why. They said, 'This is not our country.' "

More anecdotal evidence, but the pile is getting awfully tall.

Then again, Hispanics are putting their lives on the line defending your country in ever-increasing numbers:

From 1992 to 2001, while the overall end strength of the military
dropped by 23 percent from 1,775,000 to 1,369,000, the number of
Hispanics in uniform grew by 30 percent from 90,600 to 118,000. During
that period the total number of enlisted accessions (successful
enlistments) fell by 11 percent while Hispanic accessions increased by 31
percent. Hispanics represented 7.6 percent of enlisted accessions in
1992 and 11.3 percent in 2001. Accessions to the ranks of commissioned
and warrant officer ranks increased for Hispanics from 2.8 percent of the
total to 4.7 percent. This included a significant increase in the number of
Hispanic officers earning commissions at the nation’s military academies,
from 1.7 percent to 4.1 percent of the total.
The briefing also examined “survival rates” for Hispanics—the
percentage of personnel who remain in the service after their initial four-
year enlistment is completed. High retention rates are prized by the
military as they maximize the benefits of training and specialization.
Retention among Hispanics was already higher than average and
increased during the period of the draw down. For enlisted personnel
who joined the service in 1992 the survival rate was 38.1 percent for
Hispanics compared to 36.9 percent for the military overall. Among those
who joined in 1996, the rate was 40.4 percent for Hispanics compared to
37.3 percent for the military overall.
A similar trend toward significantly improving retention among
Hispanics is evident in the officer corps. Among officers commissioned in
1992, 82.1 percent of Hispanics were still on active duty four years later
compared to 83.9 percent of the officer corps overall. Among those
commissioned in 1996, 86.8 percent of Hispanics were still on active
duty after four years compared to 82.9 percent for the officer corps
overall.

Source: [ http://pewhispanic.org/files/factsheets/6.pdf ]

They're still somewhat underrepresented in the military, although not as much as Asian-Americans (about 11.5% as opposed to about 14.8% of the population). But, again, the trend appears to be towards greater integration and identification with the USA.

Another way to think about is this: if half the population of Mexico upped sticks and moved to the US tomorrow, the percentage of Hispanics in the USA would go from 15 to 28%. And that's not likely to happen.

 

[blatantninja]

History is striking back? Afterall, Texas and california were part of mexico, not even 200 years ago.

Which is pretty much irrelevant. Alaska was part of Russia 200 years ago, but I don't see a Russian invasion.

 

[vanedor]

Russia didnt colonize Alaska while the spanish did colonize California and Texas.

Russia sold Alaska while California and Texas were fought over.

It makes quite a difference.

It's the stronger demography of the USA and mexican internal political turmoil at the time that made it possible to acquire these states. It would be ironic, to say the least, that mexican stronger demography now permit them to gain back these states if mexico's economy keep getting stronger and the migrants don't integrate.

 

[blatantninja]

Actually, the spanish didn't do much in terms of Colonization of Texas. There were approximately 20k total non-Native American people in Texas at the time of the revolution, and half were Anglo.

In the grand scheme of things, the Anglos did far more to colonize Texas over the 19th century than Spain did in the 17th and 18th.

Mexico has a very, very long way to go before it could ever even thing of requiring territory from the US.