First to HP,

My observation of relations between Puerto Ricans and Mexican immigrants in New York City is certainly not one of tension. New York Puerto Ricans, or as we call ourselves, Nuyoricans, have traditionally been a minority in NYC and have never been the overwhelming majority ethnic group as is the case with the Mexican/Mexican-American/Xicano (for now let’s just say M/MA/X) demographic in the west and the southwest. So we’ve always sought out allies such as African-Americans, other Caribbean islanders, and to a lesser extent, New York’s Italian-American community. In a city where so many different languages are spoken, Nuyoricans have been eager to welcome any group that also speaks Spanish (although some of the Poblanos seem to only know Spanish as a second language). The food, accents and music vary greatly between Mexicans and Puerto Ricans, but I know many Mexican immigrants who have learned to understand the Caribbean Spanish dialect, and I, a Nuyorican, have learned how to understand the Mexican accent and dialect.

Furthermore, it seems that the M/MA/X community in the SW, the South, and as I am now told, the Midwest is somewhat indifferent to creating or maintaining alliances with different minority groups simply because their numbers are so large, they don’t need to have an ally. This is not true of Mexican immigrants, who come to New York City and are greatly outnumbered in this city of eight million. They are far more open to creating an alliance with the established Puerto Rican and Dominican-American and Colombian-American communities in NYC. The Mexican immigrants, who are mostly undocumented and mostly male, are also eager to marry non-Mexicans, though some say the main motivation for this is to become U.S. citizens through marriage. Unlike other parts of the country, where undocumented immigrants are often put to work on farms and in factories, in New York City they are hired to do construction work as developers (ironically, many of whom are Chinese immigrants) build more and more apartment building to satisfy the city’s skyrocketing demand for housing.

Personally I don’t think most Nuyoricans care if Mexicans are moving into traditionally Puerto Rican neighborhoods because many of us no longer live there and feel the Mexican presence helps keep Spanish Harlem Spanish. The Mexican immigrants refer to the neighborhood as “El Barrio”, just as the Puerto Ricans have called it for decades. I would feel like a hypocrite saying that Mexicans can’t move to New York because I know there were plenty of Italians who didn’t want my grandparents moving into their neighborhood (Spanish Harlem was an Italian neighborhood until Puerto Rican immigrants settled there almost 80 years ago). I’ve visited Spanish Harlem (for a Nuyorican, a visit to El Barrio is akin to a Muslim’s pilgrimage to Mecca) recently and have found the Mexicans there to be humble and respectful of Spanish Harlem’s Puerto Rican heritage. In a very telling scene, brand new Mexican flags hang from the neighborhood’s streetlights right next to old, tattered, weathered Puerto Rican flags.

In response to Urbanleftbehind, I am by no means an expert on Chicago or the Midwest. So sorry if my info is a bit outdated. Never been to the Windy City, and since you apparently are, I’ll take your word for it that M/MA/X people are a sizable community there. I have to admit, though, I don’t quite understand the comment you made about Arabs moving to Detroit. I’ve been to Decrepit Detroit; I thought Dearborn, MI was the big Middle Eastern community in the Midwest.

HP, despite my gross overlooking of the large Mexican/Xicano community in Chicago, how accurate do you feel was my assessment of the Mexican/Mexican-American/Xicano community in the U.S.?

I’m not the only one,

In your Mexican/Xicano narrative you totally blew (flew?) over Chicago and the midwest. It reminds me of all the textbooks in school that put Chicago in the Puerto Rican column when in fact the Latino population in Chicago and suburbs has at a minimum always been 2 to 1 Mexican: Puerto Rican. Now its like 85%. We’re also deep in several neighboring states. I’ll admit that Puerto Ricans have been more prominent in electoral office here, but being Mexican was not subject to as much “oppression” as other places and in turn less politically active, for several reasons:

1. The white community in Chicago was significantly more immigrant and catholic and thus partially more welcoming. Mexicans were simply another ethnic group.

2. Mexicans since coming during the Revolucion and aa part of Bracero programs had access to higher pay unionized jobs and more skilled construction trade jobs as well.

3. The dominant political machines reached out earlier and with more reward (Google HDO).

4. Chicago has historically been more overwhelmingly black and thus Mexicans benefited from being seen as a lesser evil. Arabs didnt move to Detroit for the cheaper cars.

Obama just sent Edward Kennedy to do the stumping for him on El Piolin’s show. Obama needs to go on Piolin’s show himself, or at least show up in Huntington Park…

Your hero Michelle Malkin says it’s ’cause immigrants were naturalized under Clinton: Biggest missed Super Tuesday story : What kind of Latinos were voting? http://culturekitchen.com/liza/blog/biggest_missed_super_tuesday_story_what_kind_of_la

One unrelated question, you write, Historically Puerto Rican neighborhoods in New York City like Spanish Harlem, where my parents of Puerto Rican heritage were born and raised is now a Mexican neighborhood with tacquerias (Mexican restaurants) outnumbering cuchifrito joints (Puerto, Cuban and Dominican restaurants). Large parts of Brooklyn and Queens have also become Mexican, again, mostly from the state of Pueblo.

I’m curious, how has this affected the relationship between Puerto Ricans and Mexicans?

First of all, bloggers are independent voicers. If were weren’t so fiercely independent and itching to speak our own minds, we’d just shut the hell up, not blog at all and read USA Today like the everyone else. We’d probably bitch about the shitty media coverage, as everyone does. But we certainly wouldn’t be blogging. People who like to conform, who don’t like to rock the boat are the ones voting for HRC. Those who think for themselves or are basically itching to stand out are voting for Obama.

The other reason is that I agree that Latinos are not one massive monolithic voting bloc, but rather a fractured community based on ethnic differences. There is no Latino Al Sharpton; and if there is, not every Latino responds to him or even knows he exists. I feel the Latino community is divided into a few subgroups:
1) Mexicans/Mexican-Americans/Xicanos: mainly in the West, the Southwest and an increasing presence in the Southern states, with the exception of Florida. Oldest demographic in the U.S. and the largest demographic numerically and do not really need to align themselves with any other minority group because of their numbers. Some Xicano groups may align themselves with Native Americans.
2) Cubans: Mainly based in Miami but also with a sizable population in New Jersey. They are the smallest demographic but the most powerful politically and also the whitest as well as the wealthiest. They vote Republican and consistently align themselves with Jewish-Americans.
3) Afro-Latinos: mainly based in the northeast (NY, Conn. and NJ) but also in sizable populations in Pennsylvania, Ohio and Illinois. Mostly Puerto Rican and Dominican, but also Colombian, Venezuelan, Central American, Afro-Cuban and Brazilian. I am a member of this group and we consistently align ourselves with African-Americans and other West Indian groups like Jamaicans, Haitians and Guyanese. Smaller demographic than the Mexicans/Mexican-Americans/Xicanos and probably the weakest Latino demographic politically as well as the poorest. De facto junior partners in the Civil Rights Movement. Mexican immigrants (mostly Poblanos) are increasing in numbers in New York City and their children will most likely compete with Afro-Latinos for political and economic power or intermarry and align themselves with us. The latter is more likely, as most of these Poblano immigrants are men. Historically Puerto Rican neighborhoods in New York City like Spanish Harlem, where my parents of Puerto Rican heritage were born and raised is now a Mexican neighborhood with tacquerias (Mexican restaurants) outnumbering cuchifrito joints (Puerto, Cuban and Dominican restaurants). Large parts of Brooklyn and Queens have also become Mexican, again, mostly from the state of Pueblo.

What I gave is mostly a generalization. Obviously there will be some Latinos who do not easily fall into these categories. But I feel that anyone who is looking to capture the Latino vote nationwide will have to seriously pay attention to the distinctions between these three subgroups and will have to launch at least three different outreach campaigns. I feel Obama can do this better because he can attract political moderates and right-wingers (who are well-represented in the Cuban-American community) as well as appeal to Afro-Latinos, who will usually support in local elections whoever is not white.

I think because of a lack of universal Latino leadership, in national elections Latinos tend to support the leadership of the National Democratic Party. And the Clintons (rather, Bill) are a core part of that national Democratic leadership, moreso than Howard Dean or Nancy Pelosi. Obama is clearly NOT a part of the national Democratic leadership, but that will definitely change is he is elected President, and will probably change since he is currently a frontrunner for the Democratic nomination.

I think the Democratic party on the national level takes the Latino vote for granted, as Hillary is doing with this election. Still, more members of my subgroup voted for Hillary than they did for Obama. My mother actually called me a traitor for not voting for Hillary, as she did. I agree with HP that less educated Latinos will side with Hillary. Most of my mother’s Latina friends and their families voted for Hillary. When I asked why, they said because “everyone else was doing it” and/or because they like Bill Clinton, which are both stupid reasons to support Hillary.

HP, this was an excellent topic that I believed deserved the attention and discussion it received. Bien hecho!

You (and I) follow Latino bloggers who are mainly English speakers. Some people think that the Spanish-language news media did a better job of covering the HRC campaign rather than the Obama campaign. Who knows.

However, I don’t think candidate preference means we’re necessarily out of step with our community or we are prioritizing different issues.