I might do a blow out on the topic in the root section,
but I have a computer networking test tomorrow on application and transport layer shenanigans. So I'll leave it at this till(if) then
(NOTE: Just because someone says Afro-Latino doesn't mean they aren't heavily/majority something else also)



(NOTE: Just because someone says Afro-Latino doesn't mean they aren't heavily/majority something else also)
To be transparent here my major point of contention is that whenever a news article or statistic says "Latino" this or "Hispanic" that people try and play down the fact that terms like "Latino"(geographic) and "Hispanic"(linguistic) are general terms hardly ever suitable for further comparison to a racial group like African Americans.
To be explicit - People act like the term "Latino" & "Hispanic" is talking about mestizos(specifically mexicans) +90% of the time and that you are needlessly splitting hairs by bring up anything else.
So If a stat says one thing about Latinos in relation to African Americans and I point out that its a useless stat because you are comparing two different things(and in the process counting two groups of black people twice) the rebuttal is to try and flip the Afro-Latino population as a marginal say 5% group or something(especially if that naysayer is from the west coast ...for understandable reasons of course). This is before even mentioning the existence of white "Latinos" & "Hispanics" like Sofía Vergara, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Louis C.K., etc.
So If a stat says one thing about Latinos in relation to African Americans and I point out that its a useless stat because you are comparing two different things(and in the process counting two groups of black people twice) the rebuttal is to try and flip the Afro-Latino population as a marginal say 5% group or something(especially if that naysayer is from the west coast ...for understandable reasons of course). This is before even mentioning the existence of white "Latinos" & "Hispanics" like Sofía Vergara, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Louis C.K., etc.
While you can certainly compare any two things provided you specify the sheared attributes, that necessary specification typically falls apart when trying to compare African Americans(a racial group) to "Latinos"(geopolitical) and "Hispanics"(linguistic). As a result the only thing a linguistic group like Hispanic is comparable to in the U.S. is another linguistic group like Anglophones. Likewise the only thing a geopolitical grouping like Latino is comparable to is another geopolitical grouping such as Southerners or Appalachians.NOTE: While I would generally accept if you said AAVE speakers is a linguistic grouping that you can compare Hispanics to. The problem would then be that...
1. You can't map AAVE onto all African Americans
2. Subsets of all racial groups have been witnessed speaking AAVE
3. To the extent that outside groups have been seen speaking AAVE I see no statistics on the numbers
4. If there's a political comparison being made are you saying there's a shared politic of AAVE speakers?
5. Hell, more broadly are you saying there's a shared politic among Spanish speakers?
I'll leave on this

60mil * 0.25 = 15mil //25% of 60mil people is 15mil afo-latinos.
60mil * 0.75 = 45mil //75% of 60mil people is 45mil other-latinos.
(That 45mil people is not counting white & Asian Latinos & Hispanics)

And remember that the official entity identified by the term "African American" is...


Definition of Race Categories Used in the 2010 Census
“Black or African American” refers to a person having origins in any of the Black racial groups of Africa. It includes people who indicated their race(s) as “Black, African Am., or Negro” or reported entries such as African American, Kenyan, Nigerian, or Haitian.
https://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-02.pdf
Last edited: