The Difference Between Native American and Latino Americans
While the terms are similar, there are some essential differences between Native Americans and Latino Americans. Native Americans are the first peoples to settle in America. Latino American comes from a Spanish variant of Latinoamericano, while Latino is short for Latinoamericano. While the term Latino is used more technically, it is not always accurate. This article will discuss the main differences between the two groups.
The prevalence of racial discrimination in the U.S. is higher among Native Americans than among whites. One-third of Native Americans report experiencing discrimination, compared to less than one-quarter of whites. This disparity is particularly evident in health, employment, and police interactions. Regardless of the source of the discrepancy, the results are troubling.
A person’s ancestry often defines racial identity. In the U.S., this is indicated by the presence of African, Native American, or European ancestry. In states with fewer than ten Hispanic residents, this percentage is zero. In other words, people of mixed ancestry are more likely to be classified as Hispanic. In contrast, those of native origin have a lower racial identity.
The racial divides between native American and Latino populations are particularly striking. Native Americans and Asians generally have higher poverty and child support rates than whites. Still, they fare worse in terms of health. For instance, Native Americans are significantly more likely to live in single-parent households, have lower levels of education, and have lower incomes than Whites. Racial differences in health outcomes also persist among Asians, but not as much as in comparison to Asians or whites.
Racial concepts have changed over time, adapting to changing political and social contexts. In the late 18th century, scientists began to study differences between races and used science to “prove” the hierarchy of groups. This process fueled preconceived ideas of superiority and inferiority. Historically, racial categories were not objective or neutral and were used to exclude or discriminate against people. During this time, the U.S. courts had to decide who was legally white. Naturalized citizens were often treated in ways that constituted discrimination.
The latest HUD report on living conditions in the U.S. revealed that the living conditions of Native American, Alaskan Native, and other Pacific Islander populations are significantly different from those of whites. For example, Native Americans are less likely than whites to have college degrees and live in lower-income households. They are also less likely to live in neighborhoods where people of their race reside. In some areas, these differences are especially pronounced.
As with the general population, the living conditions of native Americans and Latinos are very different than those of whites or Asians. However, some common characteristics of these two groups are similar and may warrant different policy approaches. According to the Census Bureau, a Native American household’s median income in 1990 was $19,758, while the median income for whites, Asians, and Hispanics was $36,784 and $24,156, respectively. The report also found that 30 percent of American Indians lived below the poverty line.
Among Native Americans, the odds of reporting discrimination are higher when they make more than $25 000 a year. Moreover, those who live in predominantly Native neighborhoods reported higher incidences of discrimination. Overall, this study has found that discrimination is a persistent and pervasive problem for Native Americans and Latinos in the U.S. and should be explicitly sought to end. The findings indicate that several factors contribute to the poor living conditions of Native Americans and Latinos.
Despite the income disparity, Native Americans and Latinos continue to live in areas of extreme poverty. Their rates of child poverty and infant mortality are about four times higher than whites and Asians. Although they have smaller sample sizes, the disparities are still statistically significant at a 95 percent confidence level. However, some factors contribute to the discrepancies between whites and Asians.
The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) conducted a study called High School and Beyond, in which Native students were included by weighted sampling. Among the respondents were enough Native students to provide helpful information. Interestingly, the Latino population fared better than the natives. While the results are interesting, the difference between Latino and native Americans in literacy is much more significant than you might think.
The American Indian and Alaska Native student populations have among the highest dropout rates in the country. Furthermore, their academic performance is below average, even compared to other traditionally underserved groups. Native students are also more likely to be placed in special education classes, second only to black students. Further, the racial gap between Latinos and natives in academic achievement is more significant than between white students and other ethnic groups.
The nation must do more to curb the use of drugs among Native youth. For example, banning alcohol advertisements from commercial television would de-glamorize the substance. Similarly, linking sporting events to alcohol promotion should be discouraged. Finally, relating smokeless tobacco products to rodeo events aggravates the Native health problem. That is a significant problem that requires an immediate solution. A native child could benefit from an early intervention program.
The disparity in reading abilities is evident in reading comprehension. For many Native students, reading comprehension is a tedious task. This problem makes the mission of teaching reading comprehension almost impossible. Many Native students struggle to read at all. And it is not only the language of instruction that matters but also the level of academic proficiency. In addition to the language barrier, the students from different ethnic backgrounds are also different in their academic skills.
The debate over the separation of church and state is not new. Still, the relationship between indigenous and non-Indigenous religions is far from clear. For example, in the United States, religious freedoms between native Americans and non-Indigenous peoples have long been debated. The conflict between religious freedoms between native Americans and non-Indigenous peoples stems from two very different cultures. Still, many of the same issues are at play. This article explores how religions of different cultures have been shaped and protected through international law.
The United States government outlawed Native religions and dances due to the “Rules of Indian Courts.” The ban, however, was not universally enforceable, and the Department of Interior eventually instituted a system to punish people who disobeyed this ban. Until recently, Native American religion was protected in the United States, but now religious freedoms between Latinos and native Americans are shaky.
There are still controversies between Native Americans and the United States government over holy lands. Bears Ears National Monument in Utah is one such dispute. This monument contains the sacred River House Ruin. The First Amendment protects the freedom to practice religion, but it does not cover the establishment of religion. While the Free Exercise Clause has been widely applied to Native American religions, it has also been inconsistently applied.
Despite the conflicts between Native Americans and Latinos, this act has helped to advance American Indian rights. Since the United States Constitution protects religious freedoms, state governments are no longer permitted to restrict a Native American’s right to practice their religion. Many states have passed their laws to protect religious liberties. If you are a native American or Latino, the issue of religious freedoms is fundamental.
A significant contribution to the Self-determination process between native American and Latino communities is the Indigenous Movements. Over the last few decades, indigenous peoples have built transnational movements and models of autonomous self-government. Oaxacan indigenous peoples, for instance, formed a binational indigenous front in the United States and Mexico. While this process is still in its early stages, it does seem to be making progress.
The San Andres Peace Accords, signed in 1996 by the Zapatista Army of National Liberation and the Mexican Federal government, laid the foundation for significant changes for indigenous rights in the country. The Accords recognize the rights of indigenous peoples, including political participation and cultural autonomy. They also recognize indigenous groups as pueblos in Mexico and use terms such as autonomy and self-determination.
Since the 1980s, Native Americans have taken a more active role in the self-determination movement. In the 1980s, more than half of the Native American population had been urbanized and assimilated, and the BIA’s funds were used for this purpose. In addition to these gains, urban Natives have advanced their form of ‘pan-Indianism.’ This revival of traditionalism has led to unprecedented unity among Native Americans and non-Natives. That has also sparked a large-scale environmentalist movement, which Native American activists and protesters have backed.
Despite these disparate statuses, the fact remains that Native Americans belong to the same continent as the Latinos. The only difference between Native Americans and Latinos lies in how they refer to themselves. As a racial minority, Native Americans are largely ignored by most of the population. That is not to say that Latinos are not a minority but a majority.