Talk:Black history in Puerto Rico
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archives |
/Archive 1 |
Contents |
[edit] GA Sweeps Review: Pass
As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I'm specifically going over all of the "World History-Americas" articles. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. However, in reviewing the article, there are a few things that the article could improve in. The statement "Campeche is the first known Puerto Rican artist and is considered by many as one of its best." This needs an inline citation to avoid POV. I went through the article and made multiple fixes concerning grammar and formatting, but I'd recommend having a few editors go through the article and work on some of the sentence structure and check on other grammar issues. The article would also improve with having more uniformally formatted inline citations. Consider using the templates at WP:CITET, which should have the websites include the author, publication date, article title, date last accessed, etc. Altogether the article still meets the criteria at this time, but it would benefit with some recent attention. If you have any questions let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 22:08, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Pedro Mejías
was he Moorish or just black African?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.32.10.62 (talk) 15:54, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- According to a source, Pedro Mejias was listed just as African, but I would assume that he may have been moorish. The problem to pin point his exact heritage comes about the lack of documentation of the time. Tony the Marine (talk) 18:19, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Racial stigma
This statement makes no sense.
In Puerto Rico there was no racial stigma of racial inferiority since slavery, on an individual basis, could be eliminated by a fixed purchasing price.
Slavery was a racially based institution in Puerto Rico set aside and plainly imposed on African oriented people. It would be an odd coiencidence that some hundreds of thousands of Pureto Ricans just so happened to be all slaves and black. Eliminating it after the fact does not have any bearing on this. The fact that there truly is no racial inferiority does not mitigate the fact that Puerto Rican "white" culture imposed a racial caste system on blacks thus pushing an inferior social classification upon them. --Whenhumor (talk) 01:42, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Abolition of Slavery
I am having trouble following the logic of the second paragraph. Again, it seems the writer is doing a form of damage control, to somehow neutralize the apparent historical facts by placing them in a context that seems to have a slanted perspective.
The writer explains that racism in Puerto Rico did not exist to the extent of other places in the New World, possibly because of the Moorish heritage of Spain, the forced infant baptisms of the Catholic Church, and the abandonment of the island by the whites for richer treasure in Mexico. And facinatingly enough, the Royal Decree of Graces of 1815 was cited as another possible example. This seems rather contrived and a very deliberate attempt to paint the forces responsible for the very brutality itself as part of the solution to end it. The Catholic church imposed slavery via Spanish decree, the abandonment by white males who likely left their black families behind does not sound like the example of a step forward. The fact that people had sex and children from sexual contact does not give credibility to this. Feedback please? --Whenhumor (talk) 02:04, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- You must remember that the author of this well written article had to work within the policies established by Wikipedia which requires that content must be obtained from verifiable reliable sources and not from original research. Whatever the situation may have been in regard to slavery in other countries it does not mean that in Puerto Rico, where a large portion of the population is mulatto, it had to be the same. The article clearly states the hardships to which the slaves were subject to, however it also tells us that even tough racism is an evil that has been present since the beginning of time and especially in the United States, Puerto Ricans were among the first in the Western Hemisphere to abolish slavery. Tony the Marine (talk) 03:49, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Shaggy Flores
Unfortunately, there is a Nuyorican poet by the name of Shaggy Flores who created his own article (autobiography) on Wikipedia and listed himself as Afro-Puerto Rican on this page. Shaggy Flores is not a black Puerto Rican. Flores, according to self-definition, is a scholar of the African diaspora. Persons who are not black Puerto Ricans should not inaccurately inscribe themselves this page, however quaint or liberating it may feel by doing so. --Noopinonada (talk) 02:29, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
- Apparently the article was nominated for deletion (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shaggy Flores) and was keept, do you have evidence proving that it is indeed a autobiography? - Caribbean~H.Q. 02:33, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Removing someone from this page because you disagree with how they define themselves is very disturbing. Actually, I think "Down These Mean Streets" addressed this exact sentiment. Marta Caminero-Santangelo's article "Puerto Rican negro": defining race in Piri Thomas's Down These Mean Streets discusses this topic:
"In a heated argument with his brother Jose, who insists on asserting his whiteness through physical features such as white skin, "almost blond" hair, blue eyes, a straight nose, and lips that "are not like a baboon's ass" (144), Piri insists on his own blood relation to his white-looking brother, and on the resulting conclusion that his brother, too, is black, no matter how "white" he looks on the "outside" (145). When Jose insists that Piri's darker skin comes from their father's "Indian" blood, Piri challenges,
What kinda Indian? Caribe? Or maybe Borinquen? Say, Jose, didn't you know the Negro made the scene in Puerto Rico way back? And when the Spanish spies ran outta Indian coolies, they brought them big blacks from you know where. Poppa's got moyeto blood. I got it. Sis got it. James got it. And, mah deah brudder, you-all got it! (145)"
Race is a sociopolitical concept, it has no biological basis. There are plenty of people who classify themselves as "black" who may not fit your definition. Unless it is being done in a malicious or hateful manner, I see no valid reason to contest someone's sociopolitical perspective. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.204.97.18 (talk) 16:25, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
-
- Sure, and I suppose that because I have a Spaniard great-great-grandfather, I am white regardless if the rest of my ancestry is black? Why does the racist one-drop rule never apply in reverse? Race in the archaic sense of the word in the 19th century certainly has no basis in fact, but there are things called genes. We are all the same species, but we have great variety. To dumb this down, a cocker spaniel is not a chow chow, but they are both dogs. A chow chow who is 1/8 cocker is not a cocker. If there is no such thing as race, the existence of a black Puerto Rican web page should be questioned, since there are no blacks. We have words to describe differences because nature allowed differences. It is childish and deceptive to ignore the rest of your ancestry (the real majority of it) because it's "cool" or to gain acclaim with the subjects of the focus of your studies (African Diaspora). That is offensive. Shaggy Flores is not black. --Noopinonada (talk) 00:50, 16 March 2008 (UTC)