Race-wise Americans should consider the sociology down the south of Río Grande. Half a millennium of miscegenation ought to be enough not to repeat the Iberian history of the Americas.
Mexico in particular is fascinating. On February 17, 1992 a Newsweek article asked humorously, “Is Mexico blond?” because sometimes the Mexican TV commercials show blond Mexicans even though they are a tiny minority here. What Newsweek failed to report is that it is not uncommon that some Mexicans with overwhelming Indian blood celebrate when, due to Mendel laws, one of their newborns surprisingly looks much whiter than most members of their family.
The most surreal case I’ve witnessed happened in the 1990s during a show of an extreme leftist in Chapultepec’s Casa del Lago, in the open forum for stand-up comedians. I was fascinated to see books on sell authored by Stalin, Trotsky, Lenin and other commie luminaries very close a place with very poor, slightly mesticized Indians listening the comedian. Naturally, he was excoriating the Mexican bourgeois culture. But he said there was an exception: their women! The comedian said humorously that he much preferred the white Mexican woman to the common female of the proles.
I was amazed since the brown audience never stopped to laugh at the comedian’s joke. They didn’t take any offence for what he said about the absolute superiority of the white female even though there were many brown women present; actually, virtually all of them were dark browns with their families. And this was a public show coming from an extremely radical leftist in a place that still sold books by Stalin!
We can imagine what would the reaction be if today a stand-up American Negro said the same about the appearance of the First Lady compared to, say, Nicole Kidman…
The anecdote makes my point beautifully. With five hundred years of miscegenation many “Latin” Americans, even the darkest proles, still can tell the abyssal difference between the superiority of the Aryan female before the Neanderthalesque native.
4 replies on “Surreal Mexico”
See also this thread about my writings on “The Ibero and the mestizo”.
Love your blog, César. I’ve been lurking for quite some time.
Your jab at so-called ‘Neanderthalesque’ natives bothers me a little, though. Typically, the more advanced populations have a HIGHER percentage of Neanderthal genes. The most primitive people (for instance, Sub-Saharan Africans) have been shown not to have any Neanderthal admixture. The typical perception of Neanderthals as savage apes is starting to be questioned.
I realize you use Neanderthal as a synonym for primitive and that’s okay. Sorry to nitpick.
No problem. I grew up in the 60s and 70s when the term was used as “primitive.” It’s interesting though that in one of the pivotal articles of this blog it’s stated that “it is possible that there was a minor European Neanderthal contribution to the development of the White Nordid race,” and it’s also said that those who inherited most of the Neanderthal genes were the Armenids, from which the Semites come from.
Original native-Americans (possibly the 1st homo-sapiens -or maybe the 1st were in India, or…) had no Neanderthal genes (they entered America later). Mixing with Neanderthal and Denisovan was part of the creation of Asian and White races.
Homo-sapiens mixing with some negroid species -more than one (that’s the reason for higher genetic variability in Africa, it is NOT because h.sapiens originated there)- was the origin of Black races.
So, the “Out Of Africa” theory is wrong: link