Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : About that Cuban boy, Elian -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: marcos who wrote (5976)	5/22/2000 10:04:00 PM
From: lawdog	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9127

hi marcos and all. The downfall of the CANF has begun. A report on NPR this morning detailed the declining influence they have relative to other hispanic groups. They still vote in some unbeleivable numbers (some groups approaching 80%) but they are just too outnumbered now by more rational hispanic sectors. The rest of the hispanic populace is not sympathetic to the exile community's #1 cause: the downfall of Castro and the embargo. So, it looks like we will be smoking cuban Romeo and Juliets in America again real soon.

To: marcos who wrote (5976)	5/22/2000 11:16:00 PM
From: nealm	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9127

marcos, Maybe you could help me out with a few historical points. As far as "Aztlan" thing is concerned, I thought only Texas was formally part of Mexico (California and Sante Fe were under the Spanish missionary system?). The war for Texas independance was fought not by the US government but by anglo settlers who then formed the Texas Republic. These same anglos were the same people who were earlier invited to settle in Texas by the Mexicans, and were supposedly supported by the local hispanics (tejanos?) in the war. I do agree that the whole Alamo thing is total fiction (the defenders surrendered and we're later executed), but the Mexican claims are weak at best. Additionaly the United States of Mexico hasn't exactly been a model of freedom and brotherhood. The Mexican federales didn't get control until well into the 20th century. Borders are political artifacts. I suspect that many hispanics in the southwest are more tired of being trampled on in their own country (the USA) than following the will of the Mexican government. As far that criminal Castro, he should consider returning the Republic of Cuba back to it's people instead of speculating on the fate of a fictious "Aztlan".

To: marcos who wrote (5976)	5/23/2000 12:01:00 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9127

<<But you mean the physical borders of the continental states, and you're likely referring to my reference to Aztlan, eh ... to answer your question specifically - No, i don't think the border is in dispute,>> Yes, I was referring to your reference to Aztlan as an example of the mess the world has in the borders department due to centuries of tribal spats, conquest, and colonial imposition of arbitrary borders. What I was fishing for is your thoughts on what can be done about it. Both sides in these matters have their historical points of view and their long lists of grievances. Some borders are actively in dispute and others are just symbols of perceived injustices in the past. At some time, people just have to forget about it and move on. But old wounds fester and people in leadership positions often find more power and glory in ripping the scabs off than in statesmanship. I watched while my family's homeland, Slovakia, split from the Czech Republic. The Czechs and Slovaks got along about as well as any two tribes that have been stuffed together into a single country. Yet they split as soon as they had the chance. I thought that was a really dumb strategic move on Slovakia's part, but nationalism is more emotional than logical. Sigh! Karen