Are they really North American?
Are they really North American?
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
No, they are central American
no, they are Nuevo American
south mexico is a 3rd world shithole but north is very developed, about on par with the USA.
>but north is very developed, about on par with the USA.
chicano
yes :3
CHI
that's funny. no, they aren't.
I wish Mexico spoke English instead of Spanish I would live there
No, they are polynesian
No, they are Iberian.
kys
Post yfw Puerto Rico, Panama, Guatemala are North American too
they're more related to other south american countries than actual north americans. even if you ask mexicans they'll tell you that.
I heard they were aliens
Whiter than you Pachacuti.
why do south americans hate mexico? is it because mexico is closer to the U.S?
yes
eh
Shut up dummy
>race = continent
>wealth = continent
they are jealous because Mexico is the most successful and relevant Latino country.
>Geographically
Yes
>Culturally
No
They are basically the Turkey of the America's.
what are you talking about?
USA celebrates "cinco de Mayo"
we celebrate halloween
They love guacamole and tacos
we use english words on a regular basis
They're the Poland of the Americas actually.
we also celebrate halloween
...
And what is Brazil?
Because they speak very loudly and make a big deal about literally everything. Or at least we think they do.
This.
>Are they really North American?
Geographically speaking, yes they are
Why are all the kind of CHIs so retarded?
No dumbass, why the fuck would we be North Americans if we are in fucking Asia?
They're 35% obese so yes.
This
>tfw el cono sur is North American too
Russia without nukes
>Mexico is the most successful and relevant Latino country
that's not remotely true though
Brazil is bigger and more relevant and Argentina and Chile are more successful
What is the status of rural Durango in 2017?
;--; I miss you, El Burro.
Ah yes, that's why everyone in the world eats Sopa De Macaco and Argentina/Chile GDP together can't even match Mexico.
>Brazil
They definitely are what you said, but they don't even consider themselves latinos.
>Argentina and Chile are more successful
Nah, they're ok on LatAm level but even Peru and Colombia are doing better and will eventually surpass them.
Because there are a lot of them and they are very cancerous
gdp per capita is more relevant when measuring success than total gdp
otherwise zimbabwe and congo are more successful than Iceland
as for relevance Brazil is bigger, richer and more culturally relevant
They're geographically part of north america
>about on par with the USA.
Detroit maybe
t. vendedor de burritos
Why would per capita be more relevant when you're measuring the country as a whole you stupid snow nigger. Mexico is the top exporter/importer in all of Latin America.
Brazil is in no way shape or form more culturally anything. You could erase every bit of Brazilian culture from the planet and barely anything would change.
how do you define success then? success has to be measured on a per capita basis
somalia is not more successful than monaco just because it's bigger
T. sudaca
Is Zacatecas North American?
lol he's trying so hard to fit.
All that snow has frozen your brain.
Per capita is a retarded metric that favors small countries. Bigger countries have more problems, yes, but that doesn't make them less influential. That's a retarded notion.
We talking about production of a country as a whole, and Mexico as a whole produces more, imports more, has harder working people, has more world heritage sites than any other hispanic country.
...
...
>amerimutt """""logic""""
that's not what success is m8 but even by your own retarded metrics brazil > mexico
brazil produces much more, has a much larger economy, more wealth per capita, is more relevant politically, militarily and economically
>notice how everyone is talking about 'North American' Canada,USA but not Bermudas, Bahamas , Greenland Cliperton , San Pedro
...
Are you a Zacatecan CHI?
...
I guess they could be contenders economically, but culturally, Brazil has nothing of value and Argentina/Chile together don't hold a light to either of them.
Brazil doesn't get to win outright because although they produce more, it only trades to other third world sudaca countries. Meanwhile Mexico deals mostly with the most important first world countries, so it's more important. It's had years of stability and growth and on track to outpace Brazil who's been downhill for a while now.
Brazil isn't a "contender" to Mexico economically, its economy is almost double the size of Mexico's and it's the fourth largest food exporter in the world compared to Mexico's 19th place
Mexico is the US' bitch but has no relevant culture of its own
ask anyone to name a city in Mexico other than Mexico city and nobody knows a thing while everyone knows 2-3 cities in Brazil
Brazil has more famous landmarks and much better known culture and tradition as well
>cap
Wtf? Where are their cowboy sombreros?
>more wealth per capita
No
yes
Post more per capita memes comparing both.
If you count Mexicans working in the US, Mexico would dwarf Brazilian ""economy"". But anyways, even without it all you have to do is take into account actual purchasing power, and Mexico's is much greater.
Also you've got to be trolling me on the cities thing. Cancun is literally in the top 5 of anyone's travel designations. Guadalajara alone produces more unique culture than the monkey eaters in the slums of Rio. No one but hueboos can came a single uniquely Brazilian thing except trannies(even there Thailand beats them). Meanwhile Mexico has so many easily recognizeable traditions like Day of the Dead, foods, music, etc. you'd have to be braindead not to have seen them.
>If you count Mexicans working in the US, Mexico would dwarf Brazilian ""economy""
again, they're not close here, Brazil's economy is like 80% larger than Mexico's which is about the difference of Mexico and Argentina
>Cancun, Guadeloupe
Americans having heard of those is like Swedes being able to name 5 Danish cities, it doesn't make those into well known cities
same goes for "Day of the Dead, foods, music, etc" you just know them as their closest neighbor of course americans know more about mexico and canada than brazil and germany
step outside your bubble for a moment and Brazil is much more relevant
>Brazil has more famous landmarks and much better known culture and tradition as well
which landmarks does brazil have? i can think of more mexican landmarks, like chapultepec and the pyramid of the sun
this is more recognizable than all of mexico combined
Geographically/geologically? Maybe, we are in the "north american plate", but so is Russian Kamchatka. Culturally, kind of, we are the most "American wannabees" and we had little contact, both culturally, socially, politically and economically with other latinoamerican nations.
I say that's both North America and Central America.
don't argue with mexicans and chicanos. they will always believe that they share the succes of their rich dominant class.
very recognizable but they have nothing else
I was talking to a chicano exchange student about football and he unnironically said that mexico is better than brazil. They are that deluded.
My state is bigger, richer, and more developed than your micro """""country"""""
Kindly fuck off and let the big boys do the talking.
they truly believe that mexico is the best latin american country.
and somehow feel superior to south americans.
Why are you retards so obsessed with us?
>they truly believe that mexico is the best latin american country.
Well, they're not exactly wrong
look at chile and uruguay.
those are small countries but much more succesfull.
> uga buga me want da banana
>somehow feel superior to south americans
Some do, kind of, except to Brazil though.
But I don't want to see a fucking Argentinian saying this, when you do it, you're by far worse than us, Brazilians and Chileans together.
Brazil has more european admixture on avarege than your amerindian canal.
you are totally right. this place is even worse than bolivia or in some cases it's worse than mexico!
Everything that's not Chile in Latam is a shithole. Mexico has some wealth because americans are tired of they crossing the border so they invest in Mexico so people can stay there.
Argentinians & Chileans are displaced First Worlers - lost between Oceania and North America and left to suffer with Spain's mistakes. Somewhere in an alternate timeline, Britain would have won in the Rio De La Plata, and they would all be speaking English.
What do ethnicities have to do with all of this, dumb monkey? You sound like a disgusting American.
>that post
>from a country literally called banama
really makes you think
>brags about being a big boy
>has to downsize his """country"""" down to the state level to be able to look down upon other countries
shameful tbqh
¿quien te conoce papá?
Mexico is culturally and genetically close to South Americans.
>a fucking island
Yet they themselves don't consider us South Americans and neither do Central Americans think of us as one of them, except perhaps in whatever they perceive as having negative connotations for their region. Likewise while some countries physically in South America are sometimes considered Caribean in cultural terms the region does not acknowledge us as a part.
Mexico did in fact use a variation of "North America" as its official name, something which would have been uncontroverted in that era.
en.wikipedia.org
The question is ridiculous, the US-Mexico border does not supose a continental divission. Central America is geophysically a volcanic chain unitying the tow land masses of North and South America, this phenomenon occurs south of southernmost states. At its largest extent, Central America would occupy lans east of the isthmus of Tehuantepec, which do not include the core of Mexico, lands formerly the bulk of the Aztec Empire, and that are merely one fifth of our territory. By those standards Turkey is a European country.
>Chicanos think Mexico is better
????? So they said this to you? They're had no idea of geography is
>chile and Uruguay
With -100 times the population obviously it's easy and the left in Uruguay makes them look 'good'
Dude are you implying that we are not Latino?? So if Bermudas is located in NA it makes them """"Anglo""" or something?
>500 years of SPANISH colony
Mexico is SPANISH speaker. Logic Everyone knows that holy shit.
We were not colonized by BRITS
we were colonized by SPANISH
No, I'm not implying that at all, North America does not equal Anglo America, hell, arguably a good portion of even the US is not Anglo as would also be the case for Quebec. North America is a geographical term, not a cultural one.
And Bermuda actually is Anglo dumbass
Mexicos core is closer to south america than north
Yes, and Greece is arguably closer to Asia than to the core of Europe, that still doesn't change what continent it belongs to
Geographically they obviously are North American. Culturally they are Latin American. What are you even asking about OP?
>Culturally they are Latin American
*central american*
If you want to get specific it's even more accurate to just say they're culturally Mexican
retarded spicburger btfo
You know the Europeans who are all like
>abloobloobloo my country is an American vassal state because it has some US bases in it left over from the Cold War
Well Mexico is actually an American vassal state.
Depends which city. Like Jalisco reminds me of California with that one street with the palm trees. But this you see other places like Juarez that look worse than Detroit. It's very polar. here in Canada, once you've seen one or two Canadian cities, you've seen them all. They're all designed the same. Not that it's a bad thing, we have nice Colonial buildings.
>speak very loudly
Er depends which state. The people from the capital city of Puebla are conservative and soft-spoken. Then you got to a place like Sinaloa where they're fuckin loud asf even though you're standing right beside them.