The <i> Hispanic/Latino </i> Debate: The Language Is Still Searching for a Term That Satisfies Everyone

Mr. Bernal says that Latino is better because “that is what we call ourselves” and because it “affirms our American-ness--that is, our Indian-ness.” For whom is Bernal presuming to speak?

There are many Latin Americans who do not call themselves Latino, and there are many who are not Indians. And, given the derivation of the word Latino , it is difficult to see how it can in any sense affirm “Indian-ness” or “American-ness.”

The fact is that the desire to use Latino is simply a personal preference. That is fine; however, no defense can be offered for it on etymological grounds.

This whole issue illustrates the impossibility of setting upon one convenient label for all New World peoples now living in regions once colonized by Spain and Portugal. They are ethnically very diverse, including American Indian, African, Caucasian, Semitic and Asian.

Consider, for example, Alberto Fujimori, the recently elected president of Peru, who is of Japanese origin. What are we to call him? Latino? Hispanic? Asian? All of the above? None of the above?

GLENN S. HAUSDORFER

Covina