Talk:Mexica Movement

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, which collaborates on Native American, First Nations, and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
???	This article has not yet been rated on the assessment scale.
Suggested article edit guidelines: To help us prioritise our workload, and in readiness for Wikipedia:1.0, we need to assess our articles for Quality. If this article is Unassessed, please assess it. See the Article Classification for instructions. If you disagree with a rating, you can change it or discuss it at Article Classification. Before assessing this article, be sure to check the existing Archive of assessments made under the previous system (used until July 2006), and feel free to help in migrating the existing comments besides from adding your own evaluation. After assessing this article's quality, please make sure it to add it to the Lists at Article Classification, following the grading scheme detailed there.
Please rate this article and leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

[edit] From PROD to NPOV

I have removed the PROD tag from this article, and replaced it with the NPOV tag. If you are concerned that this article is not neutral or accurate please discuss it here. Otherwise see WP:NOT (Wikipedia is not censored for anyone's protection). Megapixie 00:46, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] This page is indigenous-supremacist propaganda

This article is so patently racist, complete with "European blood merely being a colonial scar", that it is a real danger to young, impressionable readers.

List of offenses:

• historical revisionism
• disdain for racial impurity
• other forms of racism
• founded on a raft of lies
• defensive argumentation couched in fictions.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Panem (talk • contribs) .

So provide a neutral counter-point. If you want examples of articles that touch contraversial areas check out Nazism or British National Party. Megapixie 00:57, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, historical revisionism is basically a good thing. More importantly, the article contains a lot of Mexica Movement nonsense and silliness because it is attempting to accurately describe what they believe in. For instance, the article does not say "European blood is a colonial scar"; it says, "The organization asserts that both mixed-bloods (so-called mestizos) and full-bloods are indigenous people, with European blood merely being a 'colonial scar'". That's true. They do assert that, and it's important to know what they assert if we are to understand what they stand for.

What exactly do you want to change? In any event, please do not add editorial comments to the article like, "This is similar to the Nazi fixation on the word Aryan" or "... which is a patently racist viewpoint". - Nat Krause^(Talk!) 01:00, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

To "Nat", the term "scar" is derogatory and hurtful, and is hate speech. Such things are only said by racist extremists. Clearly you are a sock puppet for whoever wrote that.--panem

Heck no. However, this doesn't respond to my main point, which is that "scar" is being used as a direct quote from the Mexica Movement. It reflects their opinions. Of course it is derogatory and hurtful hate speech. - Nat Krause^(Talk!) 15:34, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] But that's exactly what they believe and say...

I can understand someone disagreeing with what a given group says, but if you are offended because an account of what they believe is made, then you should stay away from anything dealing with this site or a newspaper.

Life is full of people with positions we don't agree with. That doesn't mean you don't tell the story of what they purport and claim. And thisd article reports what the Mexica Movement claims.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dropmeoff (talk • contribs).

[edit] Mexica Movement Representative

A user removed this part. I don't know if this is the best representative Mexica Movement member but this is the only interview of one. Does anybody know a better interview. --Dark Tichondrias 06:58, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Mexica Movement advocate at a Mexica Movement rally reiterates "America is a murder machine.", "We want the whole continent." and "All you guys belong in Europe."
external video link

That's Manuel. I don't know if he holds any position within the org, but he is always at the rallies, and usually taking video.--Rockero 15:48, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

He definitelt holds a position with them. Hes like one of the main thinkers for them. He comes up with a lot of stuff for them. Ive seen him before and he is totally intelligent. he has an answer for everything and seems to have been to a lot of places and read a lot. I think that video was him trying to get in your face and get the media attention because hes more calculating and serious normally from I saw. But he seems really really nice. The way he talks is like he has a future vision that obssessed with. I seen him at a pow wow just drown people with information and lead them down his path of thinking. Nice guy but in a scary way. That video is not his usual style. Hes a lot slicker than that in relity. Watch out for this one.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dropmeoff (talk • contribs).

[edit] Does anyone take these people seriously?

They seem like a real bunch of clowns and wackos. Volksgeist 17:44, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

The nativists, immigration reductionists, and the conservatives sure do (see WND "exposés", etc.) And there are some in the Mexican-American/Central American-American that take them seriously, too (despite my best efforts). But let's try to remember to use discussion pages only for discussions about what should or should not be included in an article, shall we?--Rockero 18:01, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Disney I'm sure Disney is considering them with some seriousness. These guys were successful in derailing a $20 MILLION movie project called "Zapata" which Disney never released. It starred Antonio Banderas. The Mexica guys did a boycott on Disney and after a year got the movie killed. They also got Salma Hyek to change her public comments about claiming her Mexican pride. These guys are actually getting more sophisticated and bolder. I hear they have established more contacts inside the Native American community. I think they have some big projects coming down the pipe. If this group starts getting its hands on some money, I seriously think they will grow and make some big waves. Right now, they seem to be hatching out the egg. You can bet your last dollar in 25 years more kids will be thinking like them.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dropmeoff (talk • contribs).

[edit] Images

The two screenshots (of Manuel and of Olin, the second of which hasn't been on the page for quite a while) are of very poor quality. Furthermore, the caption on the pic of Manuel is inflammatory. There is no need for that language in the caption of the image; it does nothing but attract vandalism. We can leave a link to the video footage, but the image and its caption are not doing anything to enhance the article. DT, you seem to be the one who is most insistent on keeping this image. How about if we get a higher quality image? and leave the potentially-inflammatory text out of captions?--Rockero 22:01, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

• The picture is not the highest quality photo, but it is highly informative none-the-less, and that trumps questions of prettiness. The caption accurately reflects what he said - why would there be a problem with quoting it? Johntex\^talk 22:08, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

How many other Wikipedia images are captioned with a quote? The caption should describe the image. So it should say something like "Screenshot of Mexica Movement member Manuel at a counterprotest of Save Our State in Glendale, California". If we want to use one of his more memorable quotes, perhaps as an example of MM slogans or tactics, we should do so in the main body of the article. (PS, I was at that rally, and I can look up the date from my files if that's what we decide to do.)--Rockero 22:19, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

That may also be a good solution. As to the prevelance of quotes in an image caption - I agree it is not typical, but I know of no policy against it. The quote does help explain why the picture captures him with his mouth wide open - it makes the photo look more natural while at the same time being informative. I'll be curious to see what other people think. Johntex\^talk 23:07, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

The pictures are of poor quality, but they should stay. The picture of Olin was taken using a digital camera off of a windows media player video. This explains its poor quality. I hoped it would spurr on another user to add a better quality picture. I could not just take pictures of Olin off the Mexica Movement website because there is no image license for that. I do not know the reason users keep on taking Manuel's picture off. I agree it is probably due to the picture's inflamatory nature, but I would like the users who removed it to state their reasons. It would still be inflamatory even if the quotes were taken off because the statements in the video link are inflamatory. Taking Manuel's picture off entirely would remove the only interview with a Mexica Movement member available, so would not be a sufficient solution.--Dark Tichondrias 23:19, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

An interesting note about the Manuel interview is that it does not exactly represent the Mexica Movement's stated ideology, but does represent how the ideology is interpreted in practice. Manuel claimed Europeans belong in Europe. The Mexica Movement has a similar claim that European Americans have Europe as a homeland and that only racist Europeans should go back to Europe; however, the Mexica Movement labels all European Americans with views contrary to their own as racists such as all SOS, anti-illegal immigration politician and Minute Men, so Manuel effectively characterized the accurate views of the Mexica Movement in his particular confrontation with tighter border advocates.--Dark Tichondrias 00:46, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually, they do want ALL European descent people back to Europe. They just want the racist ones to be the first to go.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dropmeoff (talk • contribs).

[edit] Anahuac Theology

If the section on Anahuac Theology becomes big enough, it should be its own article similar to other religions.--Dark Tichondrias 21:56, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mexican-Americans need to be proud of their spanish heritage

As a Mexican-American, I am very ashamed of this hispanic hating "Mexica Movement" trying to present us as spanish-speaking Aztecs. Many Mexicans are of mostly Spanish blood, many are of pure indigenous blood but MOST are of some mixture of both MESTIZO. Why do think the average citizen from Guatemala, Peru or Bolivia looks way darker than the average mexican. Now the Mexica needs to understand these main points.

-that Cortés's army consisted largely of Native American enemies and disgruntled vassals of the Aztec Empire.

-as an ethnic group, mestizos(mixed Spanish and Amerindian) constitute officially 65-75% of Mexico's population.

-about 9-15% of the population, primarily located in Mexico City, Jalisco, Sonora, Sinaloa, Coahuila, Tamaulipas, Nuevo León, Zacatecas and Chihuahua and other large metropolitan areas, are of European descent.

-according to the U.S. Census criteria and other governmental legal construction Mexicans are 'legally' white and in the last U.S census around half of them self-checked the box for white (in addition to stating their Hispanic national origin).

I am completely with you, I am also Mexican and proud of both my indigenous and Spanish blood, and I can see that the ideology of this "movement" is very ignorant and are they are only denying their heritage. The thing that I first noticed is that they claim the whole continent belongs to the indigenous people, but in indigenous beliefs, owning land is impossible and immoral so clearly they need to get a lof of their stuff straightened out.

There is no possible way that 65-75% of Mexico is of mixed Spanish & Indigenous ancestry. The Latin American census criteria is severely flawed and measures ethnicity by cultural identity alone. The only individuals classified as actual Natives/"Indians" are those still speaking Native languages and identifying with Native culture. They certainly do not analyze DNA, nor do they look into family records. Most of these so-called "mixed" Mexicans have no verifiable proof of actual Spanish lineage, which leaves most of these claims at nothing more than word-of-mouth.

So, let us establish the actual facts here. Most mixing occurred during the Conquest period of Spanish occupied Mexico/Latin America. This was primarily a product of rape or manipulation (in order to obtain cultural/religious conversion of the Native population). The ratio of Spaniards to Natives was severely unbalanced (favoring Natives by a large margin) so any mixing that occurred did so only on a minority of the Native population. Following the Conquest period came the colonial period. Now mixing still continued to occur (on a far less profound scale) throughout this period, but it is Historically understood that the Spanish colonists, much like the British and French colonists, primarily married their own people and took steps in marginalizing the non-European peoples as much as possible in order to keep both groups segregated. Throughout that time period the Spanish still only constituted a privileged minority ruling over an impoverished Native population. To this day the Criollos collectively make up the smallest minority in Mexico and still happen to be the wealthiest and most well-off demographic. Coincidence? I hardly think so.

Anyone who has ever been to both Spain and Mexico/Latin America can clearly see that both indigenous peoples are entirely alien to one another on an ethnic level and only share a common, long lasting, cultural bond; much like the North Americans and the British. Spaniards/Iberians collectively are visibly indistinguishable from neighboring European Nationalities like the French, mainland Italians, Irish, British, etc. Some of the more dubious-looking individuals (mainly found in the southern regions of the peninsula) can perhaps be compared to certain Semitic/Southern Mediterranean peoples, but definitely none can be confused for any of the Non-Criollo demographics found throughout Latin America. If you are under that impression you certainly have never been to Iberia.

As far as the U.S. census figures go, those are all write-ins and obviously most Latin Americans, when given the option to select race and are only presented with White, Black, Asian or Other, will select what they feel is the closet ethnicity to their own. Due to their strong connection to the culture of Spain/Southern Europe it's understandable to see why many would choose "White".

So, basically your entire argument is all based upon a thorough misunderstanding of Mexican/Latin American History. It's not your fault though, most Americans are ill acquainted with that History. I however have studied this extensively and have experience with examining the culture and peoples of Latin America and Europe.

I can say with a large level of certainty that the vast majority of Native Latin Americans have been robbed of their culture and swindled out of control of their lands and the right to govern their own people. Is this the price Latin Americans want to pay in order to be regarded as "good Christians" or identify themselves as Latinos/Hispanics? Spaniards, back in the Old World certainly do not ethnically identify themselves with Latin Americans or anyone outside of their European realm. People need to start abandoning this cultural colonialism. It is responsible for over 500 years of murder, torture, rape and subjugation.

How can you say that there is no way that mestizos are 60-75% of the population if every poll indicates that they are. Are you implying that all Mexicans are of pure indigenous stock? If so obviously you have never been to states like D.F, Jalisco or even Zacatecas, which by the way has the smallest indigenous population all of in Mexico like 0.3%. I am saying this only because my family came from these states and I want people to be aware of the diversity of Mexico, because all Mexicans are not one single race.

A representation of Mestizos in "Pintura de Castas" during the Latin American colonial period. "De español e india, produce mestizo" (Of a Spaniard and an Amerindian, produces a Mestizo).

[edit] Stop deleting my comments

-Whoever keeps on deleting my comment on most Mexicans being decended from some European ancestry in the Criticism section needs to stop. If you don't like what you're reading then that's your problem. The comment even links to information on Mexico's inhabitants so it is a fair and accurate comment. If it keeps getting deleted I will keep putting it back up.

El Diablo Volador Sunday, October 15, 2006

The problem is with the text that says, "Many would also claim ..." Do they claim it or don't they? Who are the "many"? Can you provide us with a reference in which they make this claim? -Will Beback 19:50, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

-Watch any videos from or attend any demonstrations where the Mexica Movement are present and "many" use that argument directly against them.

El Diablo Volador Sunday, October 15, 2006

Can you give us a link to a specific video? -Will Beback 19:51, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

There are many Mexican Americans who share the same view as EL Diablo

You mean the view that this article should contain unsourced hearsay? If that's so then I hope they don't come edit here without learning our policies. In particular, we require all information to be verifiable. -Will Beback 05:42, 20 October 2006 (UTC)