Impact of large scale spanish immigration to the US?

[Malone]

How do you think the impact of large scale spanish immigration to the US from spain would have affected the US? as in roughly comparable perhaps to the numbers that arrived from ireland or germany but perhaps more in line from the numbers who came from italy if that's easier?

How would current debates involving immigration from Mexico be affected would we see a more hispanic culture friendly US?

 

[TxCoatl1970]

It depends on how many come from where. Spain isn't monolithic. Catalans and Basques have their own languages, Andalucians and Galicians are much different in attitudes and culture vs Castilians and Aragonese that most foreigners assume is default Spanish culture. I didn't really get into Moorish immigrants but that would be a rather difficult situation.
Also if a ton of gitanos (gypsies) come along, they could very well get classed as ne'er-do-wells prone to vice and crime.

If they came in 1900 to 1920- whether they were classified as white Europeans or blacks would have some bearing on social standing and opportunities. Good Catholic Spaniards vs "dirty" Spaniards could be a big distinction as the decades pass.

LSS whether a substantial Spanish émigré population in the 1800's would soften mainstream attitudes toward Latin American immigration, I'd say HELL NO.

The Spanish IMO would look down on the Mexicans or Cubans or Guatemalans as degenerate offshoots of the Spanish Empire.
Latin Americans would have some deep grudges against the Spanish, so any sense of fellow-feeling would be moot for several generations , if ever.

Latin Americans had a devil of time with criollos who made a big deal about pure Spanish blood and being cruel absentee landlords during the colonial period.

The revolutions that liberated Mexico and South America came about when even the criollos saw no reason to kowtow to Madrid anymore and made common cause with mestizos (mixed white and Indian heritage) , the folks actually entrusted with staffing and running the army and colonial administration to more thoroughly mismanage things to their benefit often with the best of intentions.

YMMV.

 

[Goldstein]

It depends on how many come from where. Spain isn't monolithic. Catalans and Basques have their own languages, Andalucians and Galicians are much different in attitudes and culture vs Castilians and Aragonese that most foreigners assume is default Spanish culture.

Not really an issue. Catalonia has never really been a source of emigration, and Basque language in the 19th century was receding and barely had a role there, it was standarized and revived after Basque Nationalism caught on (I'm assuming a divergence in the 19th century). I would say that what most people identify as Spanish comes from Andalusia, rather than Castille. Castillian culture and attitude is serious, austere and spartan-like, definitely not fitting Spanish stereotypes. But I can see most of the Spanish inmigrants being from the northwest, especially Galicians and Asturians, but also Andalusians, and other Spanish groups on a lesser scale.

I thought about this long ago, I was even about to write short stories about a world with a significan Spanish-American community. The main problem is how to make that happen. On one hand, a Spanish inmigrant will naturally prefer a Spanish-speaking destination, and on the other hand, many Latin American countries were undesirable as a destination, or hostile towards Spaniards, or both. Argentina was, during most of the 19th century and the early 20th century, the main destination for Spanish emigrants. Maybe making Argentina more hostile to inmigration, or a less desirable destination, could do the trick.

 

[Viriato]

As mentioned most Spanish emigrants preferred culturally similar destinations with economic opportunities or places close to home. Immigration usually requires push and pull factors. What pushes the emigrant from his home country, and what pulls him to the new destination. Economically speaking, opportunities in the Americas and later Europe had much more pull for the typical Spanish emigration than the United States, Canada, Australia etc (though small numbers of Spaniards have emigrated to these three destinations).

Until the 1950s, Argentina was the preferred destination, with Uruguay and Cuba in distant second places for the Americas. Galicians were the largest number of emigrants and many of these made their way to Brazil as well due to Galician and Portuguese being almost identical languages.

Post WWII Venezuela's economic growth made it a major destination up until the 1970s. By the 1960s, Spain had impressive economic performance that made emigration less desirable. Many of these immigrants also came from the Canary Islands.

You also had large scale emigration to France and Post-WWI and Post-WWII. These emigrants were largely single male and their emigration was usually temporary, meaning few of these would have emigrated to the Americas permanently. West Germany also had a large number of Spanish guest workers until 1970 or so, but again many of these ended up returning to Spain.

Algeria was a big destination for emigrants from Murcia, Andalusia and the Balearic Islands until the early 1920s, but most of these people seemed to settle here because of the proximity to Spain (Oran's European population was overwhelmingly Spaniard).

I think for the United States to have been interesting, Argentina would have had to have had a really messed up economy. Remember that a typical Spaniard due to his linguistic ability had many more opportunities in Argentina than in the U.S.

 

[Niko Malaka]

The Spanish IMO would look down on the Mexicans or Cubans or Guatemalans as degenerate offshoots of the Spanish Empire.
Latin Americans would have some deep grudges against the Spanish, so any sense of fellow-feeling would be moot for several generations , if ever.

Latin Americans had a devil of time with criollos who made a big deal about pure Spanish blood and being cruel absentee landlords during the colonial period.

The revolutions that liberated Mexico and South America came about when even the criollos saw no reason to kowtow to Madrid anymore and made common cause with mestizos (mixed white and Indian heritage) , the folks actually entrusted with staffing and running the army and colonial administration to more thoroughly mismanage things to their benefit often with the best of intentions.

YMMV.

As you said, spain is not monolithic, and not only due to cultural divisions. So, I don't know why you assume that people of spanish origin would necessarily or mainly tend to look down latin-americans.

Also, I find your summary of hispano-american independencies is an excesive symplification, racial identities were not the only issues during the process, as usual, nor were the sides so well defined etc. But of course, the subject deserves a deeper discussion, and this is not the thread. Anyway, people are not walking history books, nor machines determined by past big politics and I can't see how those questions about the independencies etc would have a notable effect in the day to day attitudes of the immigrants, considering that most of them would probably ignore almost everything about it. I doubt it would have a big impact even during the wars of independence.

Not really an issue. Catalonia has never really been a source of emigration, and Basque language in the 19th century was receding and barely had a role there,

In fact, places that had some concentration of catalan immigration, like Cuba and Puerto Rico, didn't see big changes, apart of things like this.

Well, in this scenario, perhaps the catalan coca would have took the place of the pizza.