Remember

Chill out!

Lets avoid single-purpose accounts

Lets also note that the section was brought back by an administrator. [1] Due to complaints, I made the sections different. [2] [3] UnclePaco ( talk) 03:52, 29 November 2007 (UTC) reply

51% Mulatto population of Quisqueya is accurate, by you placing " 90% African heritage? you making it seem that DR is Uganda or Zambia. African heritage comes in many forms, it could be by itself or it could be mixed. You can say that a Shaka Zulu has " African heritage", and that a Korean/Black mixed has " African heritage", but the two examples are not the same. We need to be more specific about types of " African heritage".

Northern Dominicans a.k.a Cibaeños, specially the light ones from the Central Valley, show strong European decent, mixed in with African, but in some locales, the European side shows more, as is the case with me. Stop trying to portray the whole of DR as if it were Zambia or Gabon, because it isn't. Is not that it is " bad " to be dark skin African, but that is just the fact. DR speaks Spanish,that has survived and is intelligible with other Spanish-speaking countries not some " creole" like in Haiti, Jamaica and other neighbors.

In reference to the term " Mulatto", wether is considered " offensive" , that is subjective. Stop imposing North American " political correctness". DR is a different country with different history. Mulatto wasn't always " a house negro " like in the U.S context. First of all, the mixed population resulted mostly in concensual interaction, that explains how many of them held administrative positions, some owned Black slaves and even became presidents. So stop this " all the America's is Kinta Kunte syndrome". Study some history before. I recommend you read Torres-Saillant's Essay " The Tribulations of Blackness" about the rise of the Mulatto in DR. Platanogenius 06:32, 22 May 2007 (UTC)PLATANOGENIUS reply

the 90% african heritage is from the Dominican Institute at City College. I doubt a dominican institute would offend or try to offend DR. 90% African heritage means that 90% of the population has some sort of African roots. Haiti speaks French/Creole, Jamaica - English, Cuba Spanish, Puerto Rico - Spanish. The African heritage statement is not at all false and is cited by a reputable source. Mulatto like Negro is offensive in todays world. Feel free to place in reputable sources. 64.131.205.111 08:37, 22 May 2007 (UTC) reply

• Reputable source: the recently updated CIA Factbook shows that the ethnic groups in DR are 73% mixed, 16% white, and 11% black. -- LeCour ^{T: C} 15:03, 22 May 2007 (UTC) reply

• I would think that a the Dominican Studies institute at CUNY woud give a more in depth understanding of the racial component of the Dominican Republic due to its academic status [4] . The CIA is a governmental organization whose sources and research may be of dubious basis. Even with 73% of the population being mixed and 11% being black, that does not take away from the fact that at least 84% could easily be of african heritage. Stating someone is mixed without giving racial components is dubious at best. Mixed could be asian and white, middle eastern and asian. It doesn't give strong information concerning demographics. What also isn't taken into account is the over 300,000 Haitians who live in the Dominican Republic (their education (literacy rate) and racial statistics aren't brought into consideration). Suprising considering they account for at least 4% of the population. 64.131.205.111 15:59, 22 May 2007 (UTC) reply

90% black ? I went to that link and saw that it says black and mulattos make the 90%. As being dominican myself I was always taught that the majority of dominicans are mulattos, the rest are white, black, or from the "other" category. I think the CIA fact book has more accuracy towards dominican demographics, not this new citation that was added.

---

I give up This page all is using Anti-Dominican propaganda...this not about history or facts is about people point of view. I tried bring to a discussion that didn't work. I'm Dominican and I know what I am. This page has turn to the forum about how Dominican treat Haiti. The fact of the matter is no country in the world has done for Haiti what Dominican Republic does for it but hey we can't please the world only for the fact the world does care and what blame the one that trying help. How you deny citizenship when they not in title to it, what Dominican Republic can't follow it own law...Italy have right of blood, USA is right of birth. Every country has it own thing but no Dominican Republic can't have it own thing. I know there lot money been put on the fact make Dominican look like South Africa but that why there a law suit going on, that why amnesty is eating it own words, say we never said this or that. That why the Frances backing off. What you write today don't matter cause History will say at the end who right. There a saying if don't move the dog will not bark, when you start moving froward the dog will. Put blank DR must been doing something right, that everyone wanna have it there mouth. Avfnx 20:28, 22 May 2007 (UTC) I go with You Avfnx...No other country in the world cares about Haiti and is the truth..You see George W Bush going there and he doesnt do any crap..He just talks to the president and then leaves. We cant ignore that Haiti and DR are two different countries and we are not suppose to help them out because the rest of the world wants us to. The World wants to blame us the problem haiti is facing today but they dont realize that DR is playing an important role in giving out jobs to to haitian Illegal Immigrants(they may not be good jobs but they provide enough for food and Basic Needs)..PLEASE DONT GIVE UP!!!I AM GOING TO SEMI-Protect this page as soon as possible! EdwinCasadoBaez 00:57, 23 May 2007 (UTC) reply

---

Biasing This article does not respect the Neutral Point of View. It looks like its intention is to re-write history and delete any trace of Spanish ancestry by calling things like language and religion left overs. Besides, an anonymous user is trying to make it look that my edits are vandalism by stating that I added things that I didn't. I have to admit that Dominicans tend to ignore and even reject our African ancestry (even when it is physically obvious), but denying our Spanish heritage is wrong too. Several of the statements are not backed exactly as they say by their references. For example, the sentence that says that 90% of Dominicans are of African descent (without mentioning other races involved in it) is somehow biased. Not wrong, but not exactly right. The article [5] states that "90% of Dominicans are black or mulattos". Note that mulattos are not only of African descent. They (or we, I am one myself) also have some sort of white somewhere in their blood line.from -- 22:41, 22 May 2007 Dominican (Talk | contribs)

Looking at the history it was traced to you. The I believe people who use the encyclopedia have a good comprehension of english and know the difference. Also again mulatto is a deragory word as is Negro. Mulattos are by definition a mixture of black and white. As such they have have african roots. So if you like you can say that 90% of the dominican population has african roots or ancestry. Better words for you to use might be Zambo, or mestizo , but then you would have to find statistics to back this up. [6] 64.131.205.111 00:20, 23 May 2007 (UTC) reply

Mulattos is wide use among Dominicans, we don't deny either one white or black. The things is we dont see that our self as race system of USA, Dominican are Dominican that it, like the culture is a mix, a blend of world culture Avfnx 03:21, 23 May 2007 (UTC) reply

User Dominican above states taht many dominicans tend to ignore their african ancestry, would you not say that ignore is very similiar to almost the same as denial? 64.131.205.111 03:37, 23 May 2007 (UTC) reply

Hello, user 64.131.205.111, I apologize if I used an offensive word, I didn't think the word had a derogatory meaning, specially because it is literally used in the article [7]. Not to be picky, but could you cite any references (other than Wikipedia itself or other mirror websites like Answers.com) that say this is a word that has a deprecating meaning? I think that if we can use the article as a reference we can use the words appearing in it.

On the other hand, what I meant by saying the 90% African descent was not totally accurate is that it only mentions the African component and ignores (almost denies, as my earlier edit was deleted) the other(s) (as is done in the rest of the article), so technically it would be more accurate to mention all the races involved, including the Spanish. Dominican 06:05, 23 May 2007 (UTC) reply

• Reliable source: http://www.cbc.ca/news/indepth/words/mulatto.html and their later verdict: http://www.cbc.ca/news/indepth/words/mulatto_olab.html However, there is no censorship on Wikipedia, and if a term is used in a quote from a reliable source, I see no reason not to use it in a constructive manner. I think the word should be mentioned as it is a commonly used term in guidebooks, discussions, and articles on DR. -- LeCour ^{T: C} 06:18, 23 May 2007 (UTC) reply

Sure

• http://www.bartleby.com/68/79/3979.html " It was once used generically for a racial blend of any sort, but originally it meant “the offspring of a North American Indian and a European.” It has not been in polite use for nearly a century. Mulatto’s plural is either mulattoes or mulattos. Avoid all these words."
• http://www.rsdb.org/ racial slurs database
• http://gyral.blackshell.com/names.html Mullato Mixed Races Black/White mix, usually.
• http://www.ericajackson.com/writes/essays/biracial.html The very word "mulatto" carries this animal connotation; it comes from the Spanish for "little mule." This hidden racist assumption cannot be downplayed. Referring to blacks in animal terms is generally not socially acceptable, the word "mulatto," however, has been accepted as a standard reference, even though it too is a slur. If mulattos are animals, then by implication, so are blacks.

With the mixture you can state 90% of the population have at least some traces of African blood, 40% have some traces of Spaniard blood (i'm making this figure up). etc. I disagree with LeCour about reliable sources using the word mulatto because reliable sources also used words like Nigger, Fag, Spic and Gook. Censorship is bad, but there is a responsibility we all have to make a non obscene article. 64.131.205.111 08:40, 23 May 2007 (UTC) reply

Well, I did say "in a constructive manner." :) One source mentions that "the word 'mulatto,' however, has been accepted as a standard reference." That is exactly why I feel that it should be mentioned. I propose something like:

"Today in the Dominican Republic, many citizens of mixed race are often referred to as mulatto. While common, the term is considered by many to be derogatory, as it derives from the Spanish word for mule and has a historical context of enslavement."

This is an encyclopedia, after all. Just because we don't like a verifiable fact, doesn't mean it shouldn't be included. -- LeCour ^{T: C} 15:22, 23 May 2007 (UTC) reply

So the gooks in Vietnam? The Fags in San Francisco, and the Niggers in South Carolina. Yes it is a fact that this is a term to use when referring to them. This does not make it non-derogatory. How about we use something like "african and spaniard mixture" this would be correct without using the word. 64.131.205.111 18:29, 23 May 2007 (UTC) reply

---

CUNY IS NOT SPECIFIC AND POSIBLY BIASED. You(the ip person)present the " CUNY" source, so what? 90% African is not an accurate, because like the other person said, it oblitarates the European heritage completely, by not making any mention of it.

I don't know who you are or what your agenda is, but I do find the demographic article to be offensive to Cibaeño(Northern) Dominicans. We know who we are, we know our country. My family has been in Quisqueya for centuries, they have fought the French, the Haitians and the Spaniards in the 18th century, it has been passed out from generation to generation. So stop insulting the heritage of white-skin Dominicans here, like if " we don't exist". Platanogenius 16:07, 23 May 2007 (UTC)Platanogenius. reply

You should actually take a look at CCNY, who went there, the amount of noble prize winnners, fortune 500 executives, as well as sports championships that have come from the school. If you have a strong idea of CUNY you would know that CCNY is a college within the CUNY system. CUNY is a world class univeristy system and CCNY I can easily say has produced more world renown students than any university in the Carribean including DR. Even Colin Powell went there. Secondly, white skinned dominicans does not mean that they are white or caucasion. They can still be white skinned be black. This exists within African Americans i.e. [8] [9] [10] . No one insulted white skinned dominicans or stated that they don't exist. 64.131.205.111 18:15, 23 May 2007 (UTC) reply

Lastly, the CUNY Dominican Institute at CCNY is very specific and has done much work. You should take a read at it. [11]

Everytime you edit this article you make me nuts, and i mean 64.131.205.111. You dont know about dominican history or demographics!I am light skinned dominican with ligh colored(green but thats no the point) eyes and my mom is like the rest of my family is light colored(Even thougth thats not the point i am trying to state)!I dont go against black race or black people but am sure that the "90% african roots or decent" is inaccurate not to say that is complete crap and it makes me mad and embarrased (because of the one sided view this article has)!If you going to add something up in this articles ask us first because you surely dont have any idea of what the Dominican Republic is and it's people!(you should take a ride into Santo Domingo or Cibao Region and you'll see theres a lot of non African ancestry dominicans there)guys!Not that i am trying to be white at all because i do have mixed blood of my father which is from the South of Dominican Republic but my point is that we shouldnt put a bad quote here! EdwinCasadoBaez 00:03, 24 May 2007 (UTC) reply

Did you know that many asians have green eyes? http://kennethomura.tripod.com/asian_eyes/ So eye color does not make you any specfic race. Terrence Howard the actor has green eyes [12] . There are many people who aren't white who have light colored eyes. http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=13035&PN=5 Is a prime example. Do look at the photographs on the website. Light skin doesnt mean you are white. Asians have light skin and some have grey eyes. But they are not caucasian. Caucasian is a race and it seems like you are trying your hardest to be or relate to something you are not. 64.131.205.111 02:47, 24 May 2007 (UTC) reply

"IP" you have to get your facys straight. As long as you are vandalizing this site I will have to change the history and demographic sections. I will not tolarate all of this misinformation. I was born and lived in the Domincan Republic, and I know for a fact that you are vandalizing this site. Most Domincans have African ancestors, but we also have European ancestors in the same amount, and we treasure our national culture as a MIXED nation. Get your FACTS right! Comments left by banned vandalistic user Revision as of 19:07, 31 May 2007 (edit) (undo) Memeco (Talk | contribs) who was banned as a sockpuppet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Memeco

I sincerley do not believe this would have been such a huge discussion if it stated that, "90% of Dominicans have Spanish/European Ancestry" This is common among hispanics like; Dominicans, Puerto Ricans, cubans, and others who have both african and spanish/white ancestry. They often become hostile when their african heritage is brought up in discussion more than their european heritage. When that happens you will notice that they are very much eager and shouting, "in a sense".."Hey!!, I have white ancestors, My grandmother has blue eyes and blonde hair, I have first cousins with red hair.!"

Trust me I know this from personal experience. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.228.0.79 ( talk) 20:01, 11 January 2008 (UTC) reply

---

YOUR CONCEPT OR RACE IS LUDRICOUS

To ip 64.131, you are trying to impose " one-drop rule myth", hyperdecent and other racist thrash from the legacy of Jim Crow into a country like DR. Ernesto Sagas is a Dominican professor at CUNY,and not even him accepts that thrash. You showed yourself. You showed a picture of Collin Powell? hahaha. That's not what I meant by " white-skin" Dominicans. Collin Powell( a Mulatto, btw) is FAR from being " white-skinned". I placed the suffix " -skinned" on purpose. I meant by that, is that even when there is a mixture, the amount of European blood is much larger, thus giving the person " White skin" and more European-like characteristics. Not somebody looking like Simbad. Ex: link title, [ http://www.hoy.com.do/article.aspx?&id=18092# link title. These people passed as White during the colonial period. If they have a grandfather looking like Collin Powells, then they cannot they are " white" like some Viking let's say. But i'm wondering how come nobody is calling Bill Clinton a " mestizo" since he had a Cherokee grandmother?? hmm. Nice North American double-standards, one-drop only applies when it comes to African decent only. Anyways, I'm not here to discuss the " screwed up concept of race" in other countries, but the reality of DR. The concensus here among Dominicans, is that the " 90% African decent" is a vague statement, people that claim other heritages mixed, want to be classified as mixed, in the case of DR, as Mulattoes, because they DO VIEW themselves racially different from the Sammy Sosa-type Dominicans. Platanogenius 05:04, 24 May 2007 (UTC)platanogenius. reply

Alright, no one is forcing this on DR. DR doesnt own this article. This is on the American and English version of wikipedia. Secondly, not to insult you, but your grammar shows that you aren't a native english speaker. Thus you may not fully understand some of the nuances of the conversation. You are claiming European like characteristics without being European. In all honesty, why don't you just say Spaniard. White skinned? Colin Powell is white skinned. So is Vanessa_L._Williams. Have you thought that maybe that all those nations don't have a screwed up concept of race and maybe some Dominicans are in denial? Look at your own former president rafael trujillo [13] "attempts to "whiten" the predominantly mixed-race nation. He favored the arrival of white or Caucasian people over the rest, in a methodical attempt to increase the white population" . "Trujillo was openly inspired by Hitler's racial theories and ordered the massacre as a way of "whitening" his country. To quiet critics, Trujillo deployed an intense "Dominicanization" propaganda campaign portraying his racist mania as a paternal act to save his people from Haiti. " [14] . This belief exists even today. You do know that denial isn't just a river in Egypt, right? 64.131.205.111 16:28, 24 May 2007 (UTC) reply

Dude..am not claming no european race or anything of that sort(My mom is ligth skinned and my dad is actually dark skinned becaused they intermarried)..what am trying to state is that theirs a lot of people in the Cibao Region which are not from african ancenstry as you say!they are certain things that you say which are not right!!Well English is not my native language either and i dont want it to be!I am proud of having spanish as my native language the same as the rest of the dominicans in wikipedia...I am Dominican and i dont care about spaniard descent and i dont consider my self white either. the only point am trying to state here is that "the 90% african descent..." is not factual..You wrote this before and thats not true!I totally disagree with this quote and as long as that quote stays there i am gonna keep the argument going!

Did you know that many asians have green eyes? http://kennethomura.tripod.com/asian_eyes/ So eye color does not make you any specfic race. Terrence Howard the actor has green eyes [15] . There are many people who aren't white who have light colored eyes. http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=13035&PN=5 Is a prime example. Do look at the photographs on the website. Light skin doesnt mean you are white. Asians have light skin and some have grey eyes. But they are not caucasian. Caucasian is a race and it seems like you are trying your hardest to be or relate to something you are not. 64.131.205.111 02:16, 25 May 2007 (UTC) reply

Did i ever said that Eye color makes you an specific race???Did i ever stated in the above comments that i wanted to be white or caucasian?I AM PROUD TO BE DOMINICAN AND THATS WHAT I AM....The only reason i brougtht up that i am light skinned and my family is too is so you can know that a lot of people in DR are not of African Ancenstry and that "90% african acenstry" is not factual!Thats all am trying to say here and then you accuse me that i am trying to be white which is not true and that makes me feel angry by you saying that..So you should watch your mouth!!! EdwinCasadoBaez 02:13, 25 May 2007 (UTC) reply

You implied that b/c you have green eyes and white skin you must have caucasian or european blood. I proved you to be false. Again light skin doesnt make you non african. Again denial is more than a river in egypt. 64.131.205.111 02:16, 25 May 2007 (UTC) reply

Where the fuk did i said that...you stupid idiot...i said that this proves that 90% to be african descent is totally wrong but it doesnt mean am white either..stop pulling words from my mouth without i ever saying something like that..is not like Being WHITE gives you and extra preference..all i know is that i am dominican and that the quotation is not accurate!...Dont you realize that everybody goes against you in this discussion???Is because you wrong! EdwinCasadoBaez 02:25, 25 May 2007 (UTC) ' reply

It is your own denial or what ever you want to call it that makes outsiders see you all as that.Please take notice of the no personal attack policy of wikipedia. [16] Not everyone, just some people who are native born dominicans who don't want the truth about the abuses that have gone against some haitians to be out there. As well as the racial demographics. 64.131.205.111 03:12, 25 May 2007 (UTC) reply

Do you think i give an F*** about the no Personal Attack policy...you are being disrespectfull here too so you should be quiet!!What you say is not the truth Man!!!is not the truth!you have to go around DR a couple of more times and you have to see the truth by your own self!!you have to see the other side of the story not only the ones that Webpages and the CCNY Dominican Institute shows. And as i say again i think everyone does go against your thoughts! EdwinCasadoBaez 04:06, 25 May 2007 (UTC) reply

Please take notice of the no personal attack policy of wikipedia. [17] . If you continue on with it, you will be blocked! 64.131.205.111 07:49, 25 May 2007 (UTC) reply

---

BIASED MINDSET AGAINST DR. I'm not going to engage into a Bizantine Arguement with a one-droppist/Jim Crower. Your mind is made up already. English is not my native language, that's right, but my message goes thru fine, the problem is that there are " mental blockades" for other people that get bothered with the truth.

I've never said that I'm European,because I wasn't born and raised in Europe,but I DO have majority European blood, nobody, neither in country redneck southern u.s or Europe has ever one-dropped me, so if you don't know me, don't be talking thrash. Also, don't be lecturing me on Dominican history,about " Trujillo", because you don't even scratch the tip of the iceberg. Trujillo killed my grandfather in 1956, he was against his abuses, all that appeared on the newspapers was " Dr.x dissapeared Tuesday night", and that was it. He was whiter than cotton, as many members of my family. My greatgrandparents helped many Haitians scaped the 1937 Massacre.

What you thought, that just because I acknowledge my European Ancestry,which is a FACT, evident in my phenotype and family lineage, that would automatically make it a " Trujillist idealist" or " whitening/denial, etc,etc?? You don't know me to prejudice me. Back in the 1930's, racism and discrimination was legal everywhere. The president of El Salvador, Maximiliano Gomez, prohibited the entrance of Blacks into that country in the 1930's, Argentina also had White-only immigration laws, Japan was carrying out massacres and proclaiming themselves superior to the Chinese. Hell, even in the U.S, there were signs saying " No Irish allowed", and the Irish are whiter than virgin snow. So don't be singling out DR as the " only devil" in the world community back then. You have shown us here your biased agenda, like if Spanish language and religion and other customs fell out of planet Mars, instead from the remnants of the colonial era like my family.

That's right, DR doesn't own wikipedia, neither do you. You don't own the English language too. Tell me, who decided that terms like " Negro and Mulatto" are offensive in the English language?? I'm going to ask Queen Elizabeth II, maybe she is the owner of the English language, if she finds it offensive, then it is offensive then " sigh".

Be assured that the biased demographics that you presented WILL BE CHANGED,to include the diverse racial landscape of DR, not some anti-dominican, anti-european heritage biased, reactionary view. DR is a country with diverse political, religious, social views, NOT everybody is a " anti-africanist", or " Scandinavian-wannabe". 70.177.181.129 23:58, 24 May 2007 (UTC)platanogenius. reply

Dominicans who have any type of European blood have spaniard blood. Spaniards by the way are mixed with Moors. The Moors ruled most of Spain for hundreds of years and as a result there is still African blood in spain. So any way you rule it DR has african blood. Secondly many nations had slavery and racism, but most declared it to be illegal and stopped the open practice of it. DR has yet to do that. [18] Which is a shame. You talk about Trujillo being so bad, but you are still believing a lot of the values he put forth. The anti-black, denial of african roots and more. Did you know that Merengue which was made the national music of DR by Trujillo was originally haitian music [19] . It was one of his biggest accomplishments and a dedication to his haitian roots. Well, anyway, keep reading. Society by the way decides that negro and mulatto are offensive terms. 64.131.205.111 00:39, 25 May 2007 (UTC) reply

Merengue came from Haiti wow that a first, what happen to the theory that was going on the web that merengue was from PR. Dominican do there own music, don't need steal no one music like some country of the Caribbean. (and im not talking about Haiti, for the record. Avfnx 02:07, 25 May 2007 (UTC) reply

So you're saying that Trujillo wasn't part Haitian? Are you also saying that Meringue and Merengue aren't the same with the exception that one is in creole and the other is in spanish and the beat is slightly faster in Merengue? It's like saying Spanish rap didn't originate in the bronx and wasn't based off american rap. that's just being silly. 64.131.205.111 02:13, 25 May 2007 (UTC) reply

For one thing i never said Trujillo wasn't part Haitian i asked for for other page that would say the same thing, and did I argue after that?...and if was the same thing what make you think it had come from Haiti 1st...merengue been part of DR from day one. So saying Trinitario inspire the KKK? when it had a dark skin man as the leader. Avfnx 05:51, 25 May 2007 (UTC) reply

I NEVER SAID NOR DO I THNK THE TRINITARIO INSPIRED THE KKK. If anything their uniforms were inspired by the spanish inquisition. If you notice, i came around after that was already on the site. That was by another user. So what makes you think that merengue is from DR since day one? can you prove it? I showed enough evidence that it was haitian music. 64.131.205.111 06:09, 25 May 2007 (UTC) reply

---

DON'T ARGUE WITH THAT FARRAKHANISTIC MORON Why do you argue with that Farrakhan?? Ignore that moron, he doesn't know any better. Around 51% percent of DR is Mulatto(euro/black)or mixed and 46% Black. The mixed population lives mainly in the North,also known as the Cibao, while the Blacks are from the South like Sammy Sosa. This guy is a believer of " one-droppism", hyperdecent". So forget about convincing this fool. It is like a religion, it is very hard to convert somebody from one into another.

Northern Dominicans aka Cibaeños know who they are, they don't need these idiots to tell them what are they or what they are. This idiot doesn't know jack about our history. There are ignorant people in every nationality, granted, but that doesn't give license to generalize an entire nationlaity based on the reactions of some people. I'm Dominican, nobody has ever called me Black, even in the redneck deep south, even thou I do have Black blood, due to the fact that my family is not racist and some intermarrired with dark mulattoes. Anyways, ignore these idiots,look how he is bad-mouthing white people. white people have done lots of evil, true, but this idiot wouldn't even be talking garbage thru this computer if it wasn't for this invention from the white man in the first place. That's just to tell you about his pea-sized brain. Some people's intellectual levels, in any race or ethnicity, is just Jurassic, just stay away from debating things like politics, religion or race with Neantherthals. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Platanogenius ( talk • contribs) 01:55, May 25, 2007 (UTC)

You should familiarize yourself with Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. 64.131.205.111 02:06, 25 May 2007 (UTC) reply

Getting back to what you stated. It is not Euro/black .. in the case of DR it is Spaniard/black and going by those numbers 46% black. so that would make 97% of people in DR having roots that were based in Africa. Some family members married dark mulattos? or did they marry blacks? lol? There is nothing wrong with being white. There is something wrong with the thinking of people who deny what they are and who they are. 64.131.205.111 02:20, 25 May 2007 (UTC) reply

---

YOUR INTELLECTUAL LEVEL NEEDS TO GROW. Hey Einstein, when did I say anything anti-africanist here?? please point it out for me. I'm even against the CIA sources that some people wanted to place on the article here, the one about 73% mulatto,16% white and 11% black. Do you think that I'm going to be crazy enough to believe DR is only 11% Black?? I'll be too ashamed of saying such a thing. I agree on you on that one. 51% mulatto, 46% black, 2% white is the real demographic approximates of DR. Where is the " denial, anti-black, blaha blah and all the non-sense accusations that you are making by me saying that?? I stated an increase from 11% that somebody else place here from CIA to 46%, that's an increase of 35. So I am the anti-black, racist,denier???

I knew that you where going to throw the " Moor myth" about Spaniards, you are showing the radical afrocentric nut. What's next? you also believe in Van Sertima's book, that the Olmec heads of the Yucatan peninsula are Africans? or that snow is really black?? DNA studies in Spaniards show that less than 2% have Moor blood. It has been weed out,since the fall of Cordova in 1236, by the " limpieza de sangre" campaign of the christians. Spaniards are White as are the anglo-saxons,and the Irish. I'm not going into deep details about " Moors and Spain" with a radical Afrocentric nut, but going back to the article, we are not going to allow that the DR article is going to get hijack by radical afrocentric nut, nor eurocentric too. As you can see, I'm not eurocentric, 16% white to 2% white, do the math.

You think that you where going to deal with an ignoramus, but when it comes to history, you are kindergarten compared to me. You say " society" says that such words are offensive? wow, impresive answer. You still don't own Wikipedia and the English language, and you don't speak for " society", " society" has diverse views of the world. The article will be changed. Platanogenius 02:32, 25 May 2007 (UTC)platanogenius reply

You state all this statistics with no sources. What is up with that? Why don't you read this http://www.cwo.com/~lucumi/portugal.html "From that time onwards, racial mixing in Portugal, as in Spain, and elsewhere in Europe which came under the influence of Moors, took place on a large scale. That is why historians claim that "Portugal is in reality a Negroid land," and that when Napoleon explained that "Africa begins at the Pyrenees," he meant every word that he uttered." 64.131.205.111 03:09, 25 May 2007 (UTC) reply

---

SPANIARDS ARE NOT WHITE?? OH LORD 51% euro/black and 46% black,that is 46% afro decent and 51% afro-mixed decent,that makes it neutral, becuase Mulatto is a separate racial group, they view themselves different from the Blacks. Now, if you have a problem with that, which you certainly have, then that don't belong in this article. It is an accurate description of DR demographics, and CCNY-DS,KNOWS IT, and WILL agree and cooperate. You can go and take your radical afrocentrism to Maulana Karenga.

and example is the demographics that show about El Salvador in wiki, it says " 90% mestizo,9% white,1% indian". In my personal opinion, Indian might be more percentage, some mestizos might look " more indian than 50/50 or 40/60. Since Mestizos DUE view themselves different from Indians, why don't you go and invade the article and type " 91% of Salvadoreans are of amerindian decent". 90% amerindian-mixed population " doesn't equate to " amerinidan decent". that just creates confusion. So if other articles of latin american countries can word it like that? why not DR?? Platanogenius 02:56, 25 May 2007 (UTC)platanogenius reply

Why don't you read this http://www.cwo.com/~lucumi/portugal.html "From that time onwards, racial mixing in Portugal, as in Spain, and elsewhere in Europe which came under the influence of Moors, took place on a large scale. That is why historians claim that "Portugal is in reality a Negroid land," and that when Napoleon explained that "Africa begins at the Pyrenees," he meant every word that he uttered." I have no idea why you are talking about the El Salvadoreans in that they don't have a serious relation to DR. The tainos were killed off, not like Central American Indians. moors never entered France, Germany, Sweden, England, Italy, Poland, Denmark, but they did enter spain and portugal. 64.131.205.111 05:08, 25 May 2007 (UTC) reply

---

UNBELIEVABLE, TALKING TO A CHILD You placed a radical Afrocentric link, oh lord. You forgot to place a Van Sertima link too, and the other one that says that Hannibal and Cleopatra were Black too. The scholars at CCNY-DSI will be very enterntained reading your thrash. I knew that you were going to quote Napoleon about the " Pyrennees". He didn't mean that Iberia is racially different to France by that. By me saying El Salvador, It was just an EXAMPLE, about how other articles word the demographics when MIXED RACE PEOPLE ARE INVOLVED. Where the hell I tried to imply that DR looks like a Salvador demographically in anyway?? Jesus Christ ! Anyways,the hijack of Wikipedia's English language Dominican Republic Article by radical afrocentric-onedroppist will be over soon. Platanogenius 04:23, 25 May 2007 (UTC)platanogenius. reply

again no personal attack policy of wikipedia should be followed. [20] . Someone, I belive you started stating the demographics of el salvador. Which has nothing to do with DR. When Napolean said that he totally meant that it was racially different. I guess when they say that Portugal was negroid they didn't believe it was a different race either, right? 64.131.205.111 05:12, 25 May 2007 (UTC) reply

---

AN ARRAYANO HIJACKING THE DR ARTICLE. This person clearly has a pro-haitian agenda at the expense of DR. According to this individual, everything Dominican is actually Haitian !! He putted a bogus link as a " supposed" prove that merengue is originally a Haitian genre. The link doesn't confirm anything, it just says it might be a probability( they just talk about the dance,not the music or the instruments they play).

The same thing he did with the demographics. The link from CUNY doesn't say anything about " 90% African decent". and what is his problem is placing it " 51% mulatto, 46% black, 2% white" anyways?? why it bothers him so much people identifying their mixed background?

Fellow Dominicans, we have to do something to weed out this biased character, who simply place " bogus" sources. I mean, think about it, Maulana Karenga can say that there were Black people in China in 300 b.c and this character will place that as a " bonafide" source. Because for him, Karenga might be " the enlightened one". the internet is full with " scholars with agendas" out there, you just " pick and choose" and post it on a webpage. You can see that in the Israel article, Tibet article, etc, etc.

Please [21] do not make personal attacks. Your edits appear to be vandalism This is your final warning if you do it again, you will be blocked. Thank you. 64.131.205.111 21:41, 25 May 2007 (UTC) reply

thats not a personal attack.he is telling his belief and views about what you seem to edit. Truthfully i do agree with him because of the fact that you are reverting all edits that go against your point of views.You revert mines,His,and the other wikipedians around in this article. Then you blame us and place us in a list to be blocked!!!c'mon learn to be more neutral atleast!When you edit people do not revert them because we know how to respect.We are people of concensus something that you should understand the same way as we do here! EdwinCasadoBaez 21:53, 25 May 2007 (UTC) reply

that is a personal attack. the same way you made a personal attack against me. You should cease from attacking others. point blank! 64.131.205.111 22:03, 25 May 2007 (UTC) reply

Here just an honest question: How can you block someone if you don't even have an account? Dominican 22:05, 25 May 2007 (UTC) reply

famiarize yourself with wikipedia policy. 64.131.205.111 22:06, 25 May 2007 (UTC) reply

He placed me on the list to be blocked..I saw it!He placed me on the list because i was being "disrespectfull". You requested for me to be blocked [22] EdwinCasadoBaez 22:33, 25 May 2007 (UTC) reply

I didn't place you on anything. [23] 64.131.205.111 04:04, 26 May 2007 (UTC) reply

---

JSTOR SAYS " NEARLY 90% BLACK AND MULATTOES." The censor here says information has to be from " sources". Well, there are many types of sources. The article from JSTOR by Silvio Torres-Saillant ( I know him, and read his article years ago).clearly says " 'NEARLY 90% BLACK AND MULATTO'". So I request, that EXACTLY THAT BE PLACED ON THE ARTICLE ! or perhaps, type and equivalent quotation "nearly 90% Black and mixed European and African". If not, delete it. Because it is CLEAR, the the agenda of the editor, was to phase out any MIXED-RACE HERITAGE in DR. or make DR look like Haiti or Ghana,Congo, etc.

If the censor here has a problem with the word" Mulatto", then why place a source that contains that word in the first place?? Just find another source that doesn't have it. In the meantime, if the demographic info offered by the source cited mentions it, then IT SHOUDL BE PLACED ON THE ARTICLE. We are not going to be " CHERRY-PICKING", for any given person's biased agenda. Thank you. 70.177.181.129 17:56, 28 May 2007 (UTC)platanogenius. reply

English culture. Mulatto is deragotory. Black-mix in america is black. Also platanogenius. This is your final warning. No personal attacks. The next time you will be blocked. 64.131.205.111 18:07, 28 May 2007 (UTC) reply

In addition the article says "African ancestry or has African roots" which is equal in meaning to black and mulatto. Please stop trying to force your own agenda. 64.131.205.111 18:08, 28 May 2007 (UTC) reply

---

WHY THE HAITIAN IS GETTING AWAY WITH THIS? Fellow Dominicans, this biased, prejudiced and reactionary Haitian has hijacked this article. Any edit that we put, whether it has sources that are better than the sources that he presents, he deletes. Is this guy a moderator here that is abusing authority here?

The word is spreading thru out the prominent Dominican websites on the internet, " a tomar cartas en el asunto". 70.177.181.129 04:32, 28 May 2007 (UTC)platanogenius. reply

Please refrain from personal attacks and spreading of hate between Haitian and Dominican people based on unproven assumptions. I have placed a warning on this IP's talk page. If you are platanogenius please use your account for further edits. VirtualDelight 09:53, 28 May 2007 (UTC) reply

The reference states that 90% of dominicans are black and mulattoes. The current statement on the page states only partial information based on the supplied reference.

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0094-582X(199805)25%3A3%3C126%3ATTOBSI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-W —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimmyjones1122 ( talk • contribs)

I've since redone the sourcing on that and included both the CIA factbook statistics and the CUNY study. Hopefully this is an acceptable compromise.-- Rosicrucian 19:55, 3 June 2007 (UTC) reply

This a first, im Dominican born and I can't find anywhere in my documents where it says my race. What someone put was skin color, that where we use color like trigeno and so. This Anti-Dominican know so much that something i can't find where ceduala or passport says race. This article everyday turning more and more to pure garbage. Haitian made article talking about DR, I know there anti-Dominican propagana going only cause Haiti mess up there country and now what turn DR to a desert..like Haiti is (Al Gore documentary for those that wanna know where I got my info from) AvFnx 00:14, 9 June 2007 (UTC) reply

with a nation that has a large mixed population, sometimes race may be ambiguous. The Dominican population does have a history of racial issues especially in the light of Antihaitianismo. The United Nations which supports human rights has had some issues with the lack of human rights that are given to some Haitians by the government of Dominican Republic. I don't understand why you seem to have such issues with Haiti. You don't see Puerto Rican's treating Dominican's or even talking about Dominincan's half as bad as you talk about Haitians. You are on the same island with a porous border. You are the same people, separated by government, and sometimes language. The island was ruled 100% for a time by Spain, 100% for a time by France, 100% for a time by the Taino's, 100% of the time by Haiti. It's like some of the issues you might see within African American culture. The whole debate about color complex. It was government propaganda. It was a method of keeping the poor happy because you were considered to be at least better than the "haitians." You are proud that you are "lighter or whiter" than the Haitians? Slavery was You think 95% of haitians are african looking. Guess again, http://www.haitixchange.com/article_0023.asp! Haitian's are as light as they come and as dark as they come. Same thing as in the Dominican Republic. Jean-Claude Duvalier is as light as your current president fernandez. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4253674.stm . Raoul Cédras another leader in Haiti

would also be considered to be near white in Dominican culture http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/940000/images/_942489_raoul_cedras300elvisap.jpg . Haitian revolutionary and general André Rigaud was mulatto . The mulatto's were the one's who liberated Haiti [24] look up Alexandre Pétion. General Jean-Pierre Boyer the Haitian President who unified or invaded the colony of Santo Domingo was mulatto as well. [25] . So it wasn't the "blacks haitians" who invaded Dominican Republic it was the mulatto haitians! Haiti is as mixed as the Dominican Republic. The difference is that Haiti recognizes it's culture. The Dominican Republic is well documented to be in denial of it. Ideology is what kept many down and continues to keep many people down. 64.131.205.111 08:17, 9 June 2007 (UTC) reply

First of this article not turning to Puerto Rico article, there not documentary that trying destroy Dominican Republic economy from PR. I don't deny my African roots. I'm more proud of my African roots then Spain roots. How can't you be proud of African roots when African control the world culture. Merengue base African music (controls Dominican Culture) , Hip Pop was started by African decedents. I think your book smart but you buying in to much in to this propaganda. Listen to Rap Local (Mi Cultura) and you see Dominicans are proud there African roots. I got nothing against Haitian people but I'm not going have going let this Dominican defamation go on uncheck. Wouldn't you have a problem someone burning the flag of you country, especially when you Catholic and the flag has the bible, and the cross...and then saying i want your citizenship as they doing do that. Well for one thing Haiti not as mixed as DR, but I do agree with there the White elites like DR (that don't really care about the country), there mulatto, and pure African decedents. Haiti and DR do share lot things in common, but if they would stay one country DR would have been in the same state that Haiti is in. I don't know where Haiti recognizes there culture when they praise there French culture more, and claim that better then Spanish of DR, while been in DR...you book smart, i see things for my own eyes. Back to the real argument DR doesn't classified it people by race so there goes you argument, and Dominican don't deny there African roots, if it did then Merengue wouldn't exist. Dominicans Don't hate Haitians Dominicans have been rule by Haitian president or voted for one; from past President to Pena Gomez I don't see where the HATE ideology at yes you can bring 100 article but the fact of the matter go to DR and really see what goes on, go to Dominican Colleges and you see there lots of Haitian in DR, rich one too... if it was like you said they would go else where. AvFnx 10:29, 9 June 2007 (UTC) reply

more on the ID cards You are right, AVnx, those ID cards say nothing about race, it just say color. And since when color means race?? So if some Dravidian person has " color=negro" on his card, that means that he is African?? But you know where that bs comes from? from some "scholars "like Ernesto Sagas from CUNY, who does seem to have a hidden agenda. He stated that " color=indio" on cards, meant that " race is Indian". He had a rain of critics for publishing that garbage on his book, I'll find it later and publish it here. Torres-Saillant on the other hand, is more careful in not making such stupid assertions that later can be exploited by people like...you know who. and that is the problem that we have now. " indio" can mean one of two things, a person can mean it as " color of an indian,or cinammon color" or " indian decent". More likely, it is the first, since in DR school textbooks say that indians(tainos)got extinct. " Indio" is just description of the varios shades of Mulatto, but how that exactly negates African ancestry if you don't even ask that person that question?? and that is called prejudice. Making an entire judgement just because somebody said " indio"?? Ernesto Sagas don't explain none of this, so his book is kind of caca, because it doesn't elaborate more on that.

Keep doing the good work in fighting this antidominicanismo —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.177.181.129 ( talk • contribs)

Puerto Ricans could never talk bad about Dominicans because they used to migrate our island in large quantities in the late 1800's and early 1900's...Infact the only reason we leave to puerto rico is to use it as a bridge to get to the United States..Only like 25% of the ones that reach Puerto Rico actually stay there! 69.118.48.94 21:27, 9 June 2007 (UTC) reply

That is simply racist and without any kind of factual basis . That kind of talk does not belong in this article. BoriquaStar 03:30, 14 June 2007 (UTC) reply

Last time I tried bring this up went of subject. Dominican Republic don't categorizes people by race, what that article is talking is skin color. that need to get clean up, or erase, or any other suggestion. AvFnx 15:15, 12 June 2007 (UTC) reply

I'm not sure why saying it's skin color rather than race is somehow less inflammatory, but if you say that it's more accurate I have no problems changing it. I've done what you've asked.-- Rosicrucian 16:04, 12 June 2007 (UTC) reply

"Many Dominicans self-identify as being of mixed-race rather than "black" in contrast to African identity movements in other nations."

Calling our self mix is the right term, that way we don't deny any of race. I don't see how calling mix is denying any race. If was that one race is been push over other then there they be a deny of race, but instead all race that make up Dominican been push forward. This article seem to be pushing Dominican should call them self African and forget about there Hispanic and Taino Culture and blood...What wrong calling you self mix when you are. AvFnx 00:36, 13 June 2007 (UTC) reply

Taino's were extermindated in hispanola. They only servived in Puerto Rico and Cuba. Hispanic is a mixture of black, white, indian. I think you mean, Spaniard, and Black when you talk about DR. BoriquaStar 08:26, 13 June 2007 (UTC) reply

:There evidence of Tainos getting mix with the population, do you watch the history channel there even said that as high of 80 percent of the Dominican population has Taino blood in them. Dominican History books says they got mix with the population. That a whole different issue, point is that Racial identity say that Dominican should call them self African descents and forget about the other mixtures. 
AvFnx 08:37, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
reply

Who against me erasing that part of the article? AvFnx 03:17, 14 June 2007 (UTC) reply

There are numerous citations that say the Taino's in DR were killed off. They only really surivived in Puerto Rico and Cuba. Which is why you see such a color difference between Dominican's and Puerto Rican's. I for one am against it. That portion is heavily cited and has various sources speaking about it. BoriquaStar 03:34, 14 June 2007 (UTC) reply

Most those cited page have wrong information, the Cedula doesn't have race on it. What really the point that article...only cause i say im a mulatto means im deying been Black. That Dominicans should only call them self black. And there many that say Taino in DR got mix. Any one else have a thought in this? AvFnx 03:46, 14 June 2007 (UTC) reply

would you rather it say racial/color identity issues on the article? Taino's were exterminated. Here is another source [26], "the Taino race was exterminated in some 50 years, limiting its impact on Dominican culture" [27]. " In the Puerto Rico census made at the end of the 18th century by order of Carlos III of Spain, proof was given that the Taino natives were not exterminated in the first half of the 15th century, since in 1799 there was a documented contingent of some 2,302 pure natives of Taino Indian blood living in the country and who had settled in the Central Cordillera (Puerto Rico's Central Mountain Range). " [28] . So if you want to go and see Tainos you go to Puerto Rico. Domincan's are basically black with some whites. BoriquaStar 04:03, 14 June 2007 (UTC) reply

That your thought and i respect that, but as you can see in the talk page i found sources says other wise. My point is there really no need have that, a Dominican that mix (which the majority of the population is) call him self mix, s/he is denying been black. And as you can see your he only one has a problem with this, been taken out... really why, when some of the source not true, Dominican actually don't call them self by race, because we not classified by race...skin tone well that a description of someone. I don't see where the denying is at. AvFnx 10:21, 14 June 2007 (UTC) reply

The United Nations says that it is racism. [29] . Since a consensus can't be reached simply file for an RFC. [30] BoriquaStar 14:44, 14 June 2007 (UTC) reply

Why you care so much about this? AvFnx 17:16, 14 June 2007 (UTC) reply

I think the majority want this part taken off, I don't want go in to editing war...if anyone against please give the reason why it should stay. AvFnx 06:36, 15 June 2007 (UTC) reply

If you didn't want to go into an edit war, you shouldn't have deleted it singlehandedly. Where is the "majority" you're talking about here? You were still having significant debate about it when you blanked the section. I don't see where you've built consensus.-- Rosicrucian 14:57, 15 June 2007 (UTC) reply

If you want bring back, but the thing is that most of the "cited" source where things that wasn't true. Dominican really don't into this whole race thing and they call them self mulatto cause they mix... The user i was debating with was block, everyone else wanted it remove. But if you want debate I have no problem with that, it can still get bring back. AvFnx 15:05, 15 June 2007 (UTC) reply

Well, reviewing the issue I was unaware that there had been actual sockpuppet bans involving those users. I had often wondered why that IP had flat-out told me he wasn't going to register a username, and it now appears it's because he was using the IP along with his registered name to create false consensus.

The section was pretty much me trying to soften up the claims of that user and what have turned out to be his socks. I wasn't straying too much from what he had because if I did he'd start reverting.

However it does seem there is at least some evidence for a genuine issue that could make for an informative section. If it's okay with you, I'd like a chance to go over the section and revise it a bit to be more even-handed, and if you guys still think it shouldn't be in the article we can finally kill it after that. I'll try to find some opposing sources to counter the claims in the section so it can show both sides.

Sound cool?-- Rosicrucian 16:03, 15 June 2007 (UTC) reply

No problem it all yours, after your done we will see. Hope keep working with you...See don't think only cause I don't agree with it that I will delete it, I want to debate and have a agreement. Go ahead. AvFnx 05:14, 16 June 2007 (UTC) reply

Good job finish reading it, and it neutral. But can we come out with a better tittle, a neutral one. AvFnx 05:33, 16 June 2007 (UTC) reply

I've currently renamed it to just "Self-Identification," which is pretty much what it is.-- Rosicrucian 14:20, 16 June 2007 (UTC) reply

[31] see to one side it...let agree on having neutral sources AvFnx 17:11, 16 June 2007 (UTC) reply

[32] That trying playing as news...seem to one sided to be considered a good source AvFnx 22:57, 12 June 2007 (UTC) reply

What makes it not a good source? I fail to see what makes it bad or one sided. It's a site that seems to detail human right abuses. This here may be a good article to use from the same source. [33] It speaks about how the Constitution works " Article 11 of the Dominican Republic's Constitution, which bestows citizenship on anyone born within the borders of the Dominican Republic, babies born to Dominico-Haitians and Haitian immigrants — many of whom had been living in the Dominican Republic for decades — are often said to be infants of those who are "in transit" and thus not eligible for citizenship, as also written in the Constitution. This widespread use of the "in transit" clause as justification for the denial of birth certificates has sparked outrage among non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and human rights groups, and has been cited in reports issued by organizations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. " This would challenge the right of blood controversy that has seemed to been a cause of issues on this talk page. If anything can someone get an english translation of constitution of the Dominican Republic. BoriquaStar 01:21, 13 June 2007 (UTC) reply

Why don't you read it in Spanish, anything that are translated then to loss it meaning. What make a good source is a source that comes from plave that can be trusted, other wise it only people thoughts. If you can use any "source" i the internet then how good of a source is that. The internet is full of people thoughts and nothing wrong with that, but when people take that as facts that whole different issue AvFnx 08:09, 13 June 2007 (UTC) reply

Dominican Americans--like many other Hispanics--often shun the rigid racial model prevalent in U.S. society and instead view themselves as racially mixed, neither white nor black, nor other single race ^{citation needed}. Since 1980, the Census Bureau has asked U.S. residents to classify their race separately from their Hispanic origin, if any. In 1990, 29.2% of Dominican Americans responded that they were white, while 30% considered themselves black. A plurality chose the "other" category--39.8% of the total. ^[1] The prevalence of the "other race" category probably reflects the large number of people with mixed African, European and Amerindian ancestry, usually grouped under the folk term indio in the Dominican Republic (73% of the bitches Dominicans are mixed European, African, and Taino Amerinidan descent). In the United States, they often define their racial identity in ethnic terms--that is, based on their national origin--or in pan-ethnic terms, such as Hispanics or Latinos (the self-titles used by a small percentage of Dominican Americans whom lived or their parents lived in the US before 1960, as the majority of Dominicans with a solely national self-title "(Nuyo) Dominican Yorks" and kiss ass "Puerto-Dominicans" arrived later). Thus, Dominican Americans contest the country's traditionally narrow view on race by expanding the number of possible racial categories or pressing for the public recognition of racially mixed persons ( Dominican Americans are both mulatto and mestizo). At any rate, the current system of racial classification in the United States does not capture well the multiracial Hispanic experience in general, as recent research suggests. ^[2]

from Dominican American

seem to be a better one then the one in Dominican Republic page. It only a thought AvFnx 06:23, 17 June 2007 (UTC) reply

The trouble is, you did a full copy and paste of this section, and it is written with a direct focus on Dominican Americans, not Dominicans in general. It will need to be edited before it can be put in. You didn't even edit out the references to the United States or the words "Dominican American." I've reverted it as it doesn't really belong in the Dominican Republic artmatticle in that current wording.-- Rosicrucian ^Talk 01:22, 19 July 2007 (UTC) reply

I agree w/ you, I actually haven't had the time to edit it. But for the record the American meaning people born in USA is something not many people in Latin American agree with...they say the American as well AvFnx 01:40, 4 August 2007 (UTC) reply

According to a recent poll commissioned by Hoy newspaper and prepared by the GALLUP polling firm, 55% of those polled see your fucking mother themselves as "Indian". This probably does not mean that they think of themselves as descendant of native Americans, since "indio" in the Dominican Republic usually only refers to the color of the skin. According to the same poll, 16% think of themselves as mulatos, 12.5% as black, 12% as white, 2.4% yellow and 1% as "jabao", which in the Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico is a term used to describe a black person with European face features (such as Hally Berry).

In a related matter, the portal in a note referring to the same poll states that the Dominican identification card no longer specifies the holder's race and ethnicity is not a requirement on most official documents. Since I don't live there anymore and don't have access to that document I cannot verify if that is indeed correct.-- Ulises Jorge

http://www.hoy.com.do/article.aspx?id=122719

I agree with the first comment here, is that entire tirade about how they lost their africanness really needed. It completely ignores the 500 years the DR has experienced as a racial melting pot and the dominican experience and culture that has evolved since them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.182.34.21 ( talk) 23:57, 6 October 2007 (UTC) reply

I strongly disagree this part of article. Dominican Republic population doesn't see it self as race, or any where in the government paper is there race. This article make seem like it a race, where it actually it skin color. AvFnx 05:10, 8 October 2007 (UTC) reply

if no one disagree ima erase it AvFnx 15:20, 11 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Well that section appears to be cited. If you can find evidence that shows that this isn't the case then please posted it and allow other people to debate it. Have you contacted Alabamaboy ? he seems to be the one who inserted the section. [34] 149.68.105.27 16:23, 11 October 2007 (UTC) reply

If you look here, he is actually an administrator. So he should be simple to contact. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alabamaboy 149.68.105.27 16:26, 11 October 2007 (UTC) reply

I believe the section should stay (even though I didn't originally write it--I merely reinserted the section after an editor deleted it in what may have been a simple case of vandalism). First of all, the section is nicely sourced and appears to be accurate. Second, the section mentions that "Dominicans tend to classify themselves as having dark skin, but by no means black or African," which is as AvFnx states. Third, the section covers Antihaitianismo, which would be difficult to address in the article without first discussing the racial identification issue. I should also mention that the section appears to have been created by consensus after discussion on this talk page (see Talk:Dominican_Republic#Self-identification and Talk:Dominican_Republic/Archive_2#DEMOGRAPHICS). Other thoughts?-- Alabamaboy 17:54, 11 October 2007 (UTC) reply

What is the purpose of having both the "Racial identity issues" and the "Self-identification" on the same article? They both seems to refer to the same subject. ujorge —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 16:17, 13 October 2007 (UTC) reply

This wasn't a consensus, the only was that when i copy and paste the Dominican-American articles, was agree that i couldn't do that. The original author was block from this. I haven't been active to take a cool down and more contractive. There still lot things in here that seen to be anti-Dominican. Like why have Racial identity issues and Self-identification when they talk about the same thing. Other thing i never said Dominican by no means consider our self African. It a fact Dominican are a mixture of Taino (there been study done that show the average Dominican does have Taino blood...but that hole other issue let agree that it big part of Dominican culture), European, and African. The thing is that we don't chose one over the other, and don't live by that rule if you 1/8 Black then you African. Put simple we don't look at race, and also that article of anti... was written by the same person that been block. So i think that should be the only reason to keep something that first of make no sense to start with and that article should actually be erase (antiHaitian) AvFnx 17:54, 13 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Actually, my block was taken off [35] by an administrator as a result of my filing a suspected sockpuppet of EdwinCasadoBaez http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/EdwinCasadoBaez which led to a compromise being made. In answer to your statement. There is no Taino blood in current DR's. They were exterminated by the spaniards. [36] . You state that DR doesn't look at blood, but there are hundreds of references to the contrary including [37] [38] [39] [40] [41] [42] and more. You know it's really not about people "hating" on DR. It's simply an encyclopedia and people placing in factual information. This site is huge though and there are more places to work on! YoSoyGuapo 01:07, 14 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Actually your block was lifted as a result of a compromise that you would not edit disruptively (a second chance of sorts), which so far it appears you have done, but that's the correct reason and the restriction still applies. - Caribbean~H.Q. 01:21, 14 October 2007 (UTC) reply

The History channel had a program about Doc. done test on PR and DR and found that the average person has Taino blood, and don't matter that not the point. Why do we have two tittle about the same thing. The fact of the matter there no system in the gov't issue document that says race. I never said "hating on DR" im only putting my point as everyone has done, that what make this a great encyclopedia. Now back to the point why do we have two section talking about the same thing w/ different tittle ? AvFnx 03:34, 16 October 2007 (UTC) reply

I wasn't speaking about you when I spoke about hating on DR. I was speaking about when debate has come up in the past, people start to state that they are hating on DR. [43] . Just to clarify things for you. The Taino's were a part of the Arawak nation and were in conflict with the Carib tribes. [44] It is true that Taino's existed [45] and continue to exist in PR http://www.taino-tribe.org/diplo.htm [46] accounting for 1% of the population [47] [48] while being recognized by the US government [49] . Even if they were subject to near extermination. [50] Now you stated that the average person in DR has taino blood I would like for you to please find that article. Because I have found articles that support that PR's have taino blood via DNA study, but Dominican's have blood that traces from Florida or the Yucaton (mexico) [51] page 9 In Cuba indians did survive [52] The native population in Hispanola, within 20 years they were down to 5% of the original population [53] and was eventually (2/3 of which is DR) was exterminated [54] http[://www.dominican-rep.com/history.html] [55] [56] [57].

In terms of the government racism. [58] page 8In DR it did exist. Even if there is no clear racial divide. [59] This was called antihaitianismo. Today identity cards won't be issues to those of black origin. http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=37018 Even if they are born in DR, which goes against the Dominican constitution. I do agree that the sections are similiar, perhaps it would be better to differentiate them. YoSoyGuapo 15:40, 16 October 2007 (UTC) reply

I saw it on a tv show on the History Channel. The Dominican government follow the constitution; if you in transit your kid is not in tittle for the citizenship. The ID card it only issue to Dominican Citizens. Ima not going look all over the web, to show that there Taino blood. It on Dominican History books, they don't seem similar they are the same thing. AvFnx 19:28, 16 October 2007 (UTC) reply

oh goodness...again the same thing going on over here!!who ever looks at this Dominican Article would think that all dominican Are Anti-Haitians. That is not the case, atleast am not anti-haitian, the problem here is that the world doesnt seem to realize that even thougth Domincans Are right next to Haitians, we still have our differences. Those differences are what make us each a different nationality. People think that by us not allowing Haitians to our Country and restricting their liberties in our country if they illegal means that we hate them. What they dont realize is that this is a common thing that happens throughtout the world!should we say that the United States is Anti Mexican in tryoing to build a large Wall in the Border, of course not, they not anti mexicans, because is just different policies that each country has and each of them have to be respected here. EdwinCasadoBaez 14:44, 18 October 2007 (UTC) reply

From My Part i believe that the Dominican Republic doesnt hold any "Anti Haitian" forms to it neighbor country, we actually trade with them and the majority of profits come from us. We try to help but this doesnt mean that policies have to be respected, those policies are the immigration policies. Yes, there has been a lot of confrontation in the past between Haitians and the Dominican Government, like in the Case of Trujillomass murder against some 30,000 haitians, but this wasnt done by the Dominican People. This was done only by Trujillos Cruel Way of being which eventually got him killed. EdwinCasadoBaez 14:44, 18 October 2007 (UTC) reply

we put in the low number for the trujillo genocide of about 17,000. There is no real documentation. DR does have an issue with Haiti which is highly documented. It's similiar to the US relation with Mexico. Can you document anywhere which shows that the majority of Haiti profits come from DR? YoSoyGuapo 15:06, 25 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Finally, all i think is that this article should become more two sided. Avnfx has a point, i have a point too, and the rest of ya have a point and the best to confront this is to use concensus. Right now this article needs a real organization, piece by piece, Using REAL SOURCES, AND NOT ANYTHING FOUND ON GOOGLE OR OTHER ARTICLES. EdwinCasadoBaez 14:44, 18 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Real sources is what makes wikipedia. It's all about sources being verifiable.

Other thing how come everyone seem to talk about the 1930s, a time when Dominican were getting kill too. No one talks about the 1800s what happen in Mao and Santiago...and also the trails of Blood in 1844. Every country has it good and bad, why focus only the negative...never said let whitewash history but let not get stuck only one thing. DR has over 500 years since the Europeans hit land, and all i read here is how Dominican are anti this, they don't know there own History. Back to the real point why do we have 2 section talking about the same thing? can anyone give me a answer? Why don't we take a vote on it, let see how many people actually want them to stay. AvFnx 20:12, 18 October 2007 (UTC) reply

True, there are those who think Dominicans hate haitians, and we know that some of those people have a particular agenda. Others say that dominicans really don't like to be called black. It would be useful if we find good sources to support both points and put them in a single section. Basically, both sections are about the same subject, and there are some lines that are repeated. Dukered 08:14, 21 October 2007 (UTC) reply

So no objection to the removal of this two section? AvFnx 05:51, 24 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Consensus then? -- Flor Silvestre 13:17, 24 October 2007 (UTC) reply

• Perhaps if we find enough sources we could make a good section. Meanwhile, I suggest the merger. What do you think? - Dukered 03:58, 25 October 2007 (UTC) reply

That what i said at the start but the thing must of articles are opinion not facts. Actually the whole thing is opinion not fact; by that i mean we can debate this all day and neither would be right or wrong. The problem is that Dominican don't use race, they identify with skin color. It not like the USA where it a race thing; I'm light skin Dominican, means im mistake with African, European, and Taino (read Dominican history books, they didn't all die out they mix)...what race am I? the last person that ask me that i told him you figure it out. If you ask a Dominican race, they tell you im Dominican...I really think there no facts none of this. It one of the article says that we put down our African heritage cause we call curly hair bad hair...ever thought that we call it bad hair cause does what it want, not what we want. Don't we call someone bad when they do only what they want and so on... AvFnx 06:42, 25 October 2007 (UTC) reply

What really is bad hair? Does having hair that is curly considered to be bad hair? There is a huge issue of race in Dominican Republic that it is a big deal that is why there is so many versions of color. I know you think that there isn't a lot of compromise going on, but all that is asked for is references. I can easily put in over 100 articles that state Taino's died out within 100 years of Spanish colonization. If you can find articles that state they didn't I'm more than open to hear them as is everyone else. I asked for sources before and was willing to hear sources that are availble. [60] . I guess in DR they may not have a strong understanding of race that may exist in America or Europe. Dominican Republic is a nation. If you asked someone's nationality they would say Dominican. Race is very different. There are classifications including White, Black, Hispanic, Asian. Within white you'll see non-hispanic and within black you'll see non-hispanic. Hispanic is more of a linguistic group within a racial catagory. I would guess that a Dominican should say hispanic as being their race, not Dominican. This though would take away from those who are Brazilian. What is their race? It's a confusing subject, but one thing I do agree is that the two sections should be merged. Any volunteers? YoSoyGuapo 15:06, 25 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Hispanic is something created by the USA government, so if you wanna get technical Dominican would say Latino, but more often then not we would say Dominican. I know Dominican not a race but that a point we don't look at race. yes we say skin tone color but that only a way make ID about someone. I wanna see where in Dominican Republic document does it says race, I have look over and over for it and I haven't found it. Don't confuses Race with skin color, cause my understanding African-American say light skin, for those that are black but not to dark...Do they have a race problem as well? And all those article are opinion of someone not facts, if you wanna have this section why not getting from respectable source. Only cause you google something and you find it don't make true. Did you know anyone can make a web page? AvFnx 15:03, 26 October 2007 (UTC) reply

As one of the editors that did a lot of work to clean up the self-identification section, I really think it is a detriment to the article to have two sections discussing the same topic (IE the "Racial Identity" section and the "Self-Identification" section). Of the two, I believe more work has been done to make the self-identification section NPoV and present positive images regarding the Dominican notion of skin color rather than just going off on a rant about how Dominicans are prejudiced against Haitians.-- Rosicrucian ^Talk 20:28, 26 October 2007 (UTC) reply

If i remember correctly didn't you was the one that clean up Racial Identity and change it tittle to Self-ID AvFnx 01:39, 31 October 2007 (UTC) reply

Yeah, I was around when we cleaned out all the insinuations of racism and changed the section name.-- Rosicrucian ^Talk 23:30, 31 October 2007 (UTC) reply

• Oh god, This is a closed game here!I surrender against this people...am moving towards another article EdwinCasadoBaez 03:02, 1 November 2007 (UTC) reply

Here is an article based on a documentary that I believe many here would find very interesting.

http://www.primicias.com.do/articulo,5408,html http://groups.google.co.kr/group/soc.culture.dominican-rep/msg/701ed165f9b67026 http://www.tonyconelpueblo.tv/noticias.php?topic=Internacional&id=75

in english

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=es&u=http://www.primicias.com.do/articulo,5408,html&sa=X&oi=translate&resnum=3&ct=result&prev=/search%3Fq%3DTaina%2BMirabal%26hl%3Den

I am in no way saying i support this view, but it made a few good points. I think we should all take a look at this.

YoSoyGuapo 19:49, 1 November 2007 (UTC) reply

There no point in this first of Duarte actually explain why we should have separated from Haiti...in those written he said He admire the fact Haiti was a free country. "The Dominican flag is a copy of the Roman Empire during wartime and was used to ondearla when Africans and Jews were killed during the Crusades," adds Mirabal. The Dominican flag doesn't come from Roman, it a Haiti flag with a white cross over it, and the white cross is to show that we are Catholic (also why is white well simple that the 3rd color on the Haiti flag, which it comes from France.). The Trinitaria was not only run by White, Sanchez was half black. I can take apart all it say to point by point and show that it false. Here my question what is about Dominican that people got put down. I'm sorry we are like the Phoenix, we never stay down. " Duarte added only when divided blue colors of the flag Haiti," but didn't it come from Rome. I still don't understand why is this against Dominican Republic, a country that never invaded no other country, only been invaded by others. Our History not perfect, we made mistake cause we only human. Duarte advocated a free Dominican Republic, and i graceful for it. If we would stay with Haiti we would been as poor as them, and my ancestor would probably been kill. Now for those that love talking about 1930s, let get the fact straight there more Dominican blood on Haiti hands then vice versa, there the early 1800s Santiago and Mao...there the trail of blood, the innocents villagers they kill as Dominicans patriots push them out of Dominican Republic. I for one don't hold this to heart, shit happen both side we have move on, why is the west keep middling in Dominican/Haiti affairs...we are not a colony, we don't need learn how run our country. Like the UN report talking about racism in DR, here a thought why haven't the Haitian Government came out in defense of it people if there treat so bad, why the Hati government actually defends the DR. Hey for the record Haitians DR do get mistreat the same way any other Dominicans does, that fact. Remember it a developing nation so things go on that shouldn't be, but not about race, skin color, it that fact the government sucks. Now those sugar flied are own by anything but Dominican. All i ask why this Anti-Dominican going on. I wanna see where the good point is this, where i could take it apart and show the truth, it garbage. Todo Por La Patria!!!! AvFnx 21:03, 1 November 2007 (UTC) reply

On todays headline the Nazi Party roots could be trace to the Dominican Republic, that next thing I guess. Wait didn't DR declare war on Germany and took in Jews which no other country did shhhhhhh the truth can't be told. AvFnx 21:09, 1 November 2007 (UTC) reply

this is actually 4 articles . I simply saw something that was very interesting and posted it and asked for an opinion. I didn't post it in the article at all. Duarte could be mulatto and dislike blacks. Trujillo was 1/4 haitian and killed haitians. Hitler was 1/4 jewish and killed jews.

"Trujillo introduced various national development measures during his rule and gained some international attention during the 1930s for allowing European Jews to migrate to the Dominican Republic. His decision was not motivated by genuine concern for the plight of Jewish refugees, however. Trujillo shared many of Hitler’s racialist views, but believed that the immigration of European Jews would “whiten” the Dominican Republic. It was on this basis that he allowed Spanish Republican refugees to settle in the country as well." [ [61]]

by the way there was a movie made about trujillo http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0428532/plotsummary

I guess there may have been a lot of recruitment to cause trouble on this article .. "09-30-2007, 12:55 AM "asopao Silver Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 301

The Haitian moderator that jickacked the Wikipedia article on DR placed that same thing that this stupid bee itch is saying. That Duarte was " a racist and Trinitaria inspired the KKK".

After long protests by Dominicans, some other moderator ( Puerto Rican, I think), took it off. But still, the Article is still very biased and " Haiti-centric". "

http://www.dr1.com/forums/general-stuff/67104-taina-mirabal-2.html

for your comment " here a thought why haven't the Haitian Government came out in defense of it people if there treat so bad, why the Hati government actually defends the DR." There isn't a haitian military in existance at all. There hasn't been one for years. YoSoyGuapo 21:49, 1 November 2007 (UTC) reply

Never said war, but even if they had military we have proven we can defend our land from invaders...there lot diplomatic channels, there UN, OAS, talking to the Dominican government it self. My point is this something the west have made up, to keep people from the fact that no one but DR helping out Haiti, let bash the one actually doing something. and for the record Duarte wasn't mulatto, Sanchez was. Why is it racist DR wanting be a free country, now we don't have that right. Well you know what don't matter, we fought for it and won time and time again. AvFnx 02:35, 2 November 2007 (UTC) reply

DR was very unsuccessful with "invaders." Remember the US occupation? The United States gives a lot more money to Haiti than DR does so why do you think no one helps Haiti but DR? http://portauprince.usembassy.gov/pro659_english2.html The USA has given Haiti over $492 in total aid the past few years. ok Duarte wasn't mulatto, and Sanchez was. Does that disprove the theory of the above article that Duarte may have been racist? You say that DR fought to be free and won time and time again. DR tried to sell itself to America (so it didn't always want to be free) and it lost against US "occupation" twice. So it didn't win time and time again. YoSoyGuapo 02:58, 2 November 2007 (UTC) reply

first of the one that tried sell DR was a dictator, much as Santana gave DR to Spain but we all know what happen DR. I give that one USA won the first but we didn't go quite in to the night, we gave all we had and it wasn't enough...now for the second it was clear victory cause deal was made, to have election and let the people pick who going be president not bullets...DR doesn't have the cash the USA has that a fact, but if DR close it border what who you think hurt more DR or Haiti? who benefiting more from who? and can you name France, Haiti (lot of times by the way), Spain...i still stand by my comment we never invaded no one, other thing USA military is not in DR. AvFnx 03:06, 2 November 2007 (UTC) reply

Hermano, The second wasn't meant to be a victory. At the time the US was about maintaining political policies. It helped to overthrow one leader so that another would get elected. That is what happened. Dominican's leave DR to go to the USA. Haitians leave Haiti to go to DR. If that trend continues than DR will be left with more Haitians than Dominicans in DR. Even you left Hermano! There is no need for the US to be in DR. There is a US citizen who is president in DR. Leonel Fernandez es Americano mi hermano. More money comes back from American Dominicanos to DR than DR makes on it's own. It's the same deal with Mexico. Mexicans in the US send money back to Mexico and now it is a major source of income for Mexico. It's called Remitences. Pero, tu necessita comprender the bigger picture. YoSoyGuapo 03:28, 2 November 2007 (UTC) reply

First it illegal for American citizen be president,Leonel was raise in USA and study. Dominican send back home 1/3 of the money DR makes, you making seen like we don't have a economy, and other thing there more money coming from Europe everyday. The big picture is that Dominican that not home never forget where we came from, visit every year, and help out the best we can. Other thing we don't have ID issue, we are what we are and we don't look at race, sorry that doesn't fit to your world view, but that our view and that should be respected. This two articles are only disrespecting our view. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Avfnx ( talk • contribs) 14:12, 3 November 2007 (UTC) reply

For those that claim that Dominican are racist name one organization that racist, i could name Minute man, KKK, and so much in the USA...Dominican after we got our independents never did no ethic cleanses...now can we agree take out racial id issue...1st off it not a issue we are what we are, Dominican and don't have any category where we have race. Welcome to the 21st century, where there no need for race ID, all matter that who you are. I say delete it AvFnx 20:16, 5 November 2007 (UTC) reply

Just reach an agreement. It's really not that serious. All this arguing isn't making the article better! Also http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/rwb.nsf/db900sid/ACIO-6CHKYP?OpenDocument there was ethnic cleansing. UnclePaco 22:29, 5 November 2007 (UTC) reply

how that different then what USA does, going people house and deporting the illegal. When DR does something it racist unheard off, when the rest of the world does it ok. all im asking for the racial ID to be deleted. the other could stay. AvFnx 00:35, 6 November 2007 (UTC) reply

The info on Antihaitianismo should remain in the article. It is only mentioned briefly but is a legitimate issue and is properly sourced.-- Alabamaboy 01:26, 6 November 2007 (UTC) reply

"Native Dominicans were taught that they were "white," and were to be proud to be descendants of the Spanish conquistadores: where in bbc does it says that, you know the page that source came from...haitiforver sure that page page got legitimacy...right!!!!!!....I don't know what is about DR, that everyone has put bad image of it, the only country article that talk about it neighbor that it does about it self. Now if DR is so racist which ya claim i want ya name one organization in DR, that antihaitian name ONE im only asking for ONE. AvFnx 05:55, 6 November 2007 (UTC) reply

no objecting to the complete removal of Racial ID? AvFnx 02:26, 13 November 2007 (UTC) reply

alabamaboy objected above. UnclePaco 06:43, 13 November 2007 (UTC) reply

can you tell me why is DR having so call "issue" got do with Haiti. I every in Dominican got do with Haiti, and i showen that antiHaitiano article is not properly sourced. AvFnx 18:22, 13 November 2007 (UTC) reply

"ok Duarte wasn't mulatto, and Sanchez was. Does that disprove the theory of the above article that Duarte may have been racist?"

YoSoyGuapo, if Duarte was indeed a racist then why does he have mulatoes (and presumably blacks as well) in his organization, especially so high up the ranks? Because he was secretly planning on deposing them later on? The fact of the matter is that the burden of proof for the above statement lies on YOU and unless you or someone else provides any evidence or verifiable source that supports it, I would really appreciate it if you would stop injecting this kind of "push-poll" nonsense in this discussion. I would tell Taína Mirabal the same thing really if she were present in this conversation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.76.82.90 ( talk) 15:24, 20 November 2007 (UTC) reply

On another note, I support Avfnx's point on Dominicans' self identification. When you ask the typical dominican "what are you?" he/she will reply "I am dominican". If you ask them what race they are, they will reply the same. It's not because they don't understand the concept of race, it's that we just don't care about race per se. Like others have said, there is skin color and then there is race. We worry about skin color but not before worrying about nationality. I am not going to pretend this particular mindset of ours is A-OK, but calling us something we are not is something I find particularly revolting. Llorllale ( talk) 15:34, 20 November 2007 (UTC) reply

From looking at this Llorllale, ( talk) and BigGabrial555 are the same person. Llorllale only contributions are very meatpuppet in nature. I for one support the inclusion of this self identification portion of the article. 199.219.144.51 ( talk) 13:49, 21 November 2007 (UTC) reply

Sir, I am no meatpuppet of anyone. I've had this account for... I'm not sure how long really, but it must be at least a year old, I just haven't used it at all really. I've been prompted to use it now because this is my country we're talking about.

But then again, the irony of that accusation lies at its source. Llorllale ( talk) 17:23, 21 November 2007 (UTC) reply

I for one think that Racial identity issues and Self-identification be merged into one section, not sure on what its title should be. There is simply too much redundancy, considering they're talking about the same thing. Llorllale ( talk) —Preceding comment was added at 17:31, 21 November 2007 (UTC) reply

That's what I don't get. They were originally the same section. Nearly word for word, and highly redundant. Just that one of them was drawn from an older revision because some editors considered it more neutral, and then the other revision was put in because someone thought the section had been deleted. That led to two sections discussing the exact same thing as some sort of notion of a compromise, which I believe has not served this article well.-- Rosicrucian ^Talk 16:45, 26 November 2007 (UTC) reply

In fact, I've just gone ahead and used the last revision I know of that had them both as one section. It is a little old, but it looks to preserve a good 80-90% of the wording of both sections so I'd say it's a good base state for revision. I do see above that the ID card thing might no longer be true. If this is the case, feel free to trim that particular cite out or revise it to show that it is no longer a current practice.-- Rosicrucian ^Talk 17:01, 26 November 2007 (UTC) reply

And to illuminate why we originally settled on "Self-Identification" as the section title, the consensus chose it for the following reasons:

• Omitting the word "issues" avoids the insinuation that this is an unresolved social issue. Dominicans don't consider it a problem.
• Omitting the word "race" or "racial" reflects the fact that Dominicans do not think of this in racial terms. These various skin colors are not considered different races, any more than eye or hair color would denote such.

So ultimately when we were discussing this, it was considered a good neutral title that reflected what this is: simple self-identification that reflects a difference in Dominican culture as opposed to say the United States, where many mulattoes self-identify as "black" due to the more prominent African identity movements in the country.-- Rosicrucian ^Talk 17:25, 26 November 2007 (UTC) reply

Aye Caramba! Can you show me where it says that it is no longer the valid? The reference is current and historically valid. Looking back a couple of months there were 2 sections. An edit war came about and it became one. An administrator brought back the second section. Where was the conensus? I for one agree on two sections and see them both as being different and both valid. A few other editors do as well. Self identification and racial indentification are two very different things. In a nation that has had issues with genocide based on race and a racial policy based on self identification it is very important. CubanoDios ( talk) 17:56, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply

I don't care who brought it back the fact of the matter Self-ID came out agreement of Racial...the fact of the matter they saying the same thing. I tried be peaceful and patience but im tired people trying give DR a bad name. Cuba is so racial mix then when Fidel took over all the whites left, that how good ya get along. The fact of the matter we don't look @ race, we look as skin color sorry if don't fit your world view but that mines and my the Dominican People if you don't like well you know what to bad. I'm not wrong for looking a world with out racial line, AvFnx ( talk) 18:41, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply

Where is this agreement? Find it for me. There are plenty of whites in Cuba. You should go there! Race is a product of skin color. Why don't you help contribute to this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steroid_Usage_Amongst_Dominican_Athletes CubanoDios ( talk) 18:44, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply

The agreement was made over 5 months ago, You should go DR before you start talking trash about it. If Dominican Athletes are so bad why you baseball were starstruck when they saw the Dominican team...yea yea i give that ya beat us and made farther then we in the classic. AvFnx ( talk) 18:50, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply

Cubans are the best athletes in the world! We play all sports! Look at basketball, baseball, weight lifting, track, and others! Dominican baseball players are Haitian and the ones who aren't on are on steroids! There are so many articles about it! Look at Sammy Sosa or Tito Ortiz! They are moreno! Wait till Cuba and the US have relations again and Cuba will once again be the Pearl of the Antilles! All tourism will go back to Cuba! CubanoDios ( talk) 18:53, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply

If race is a product of skin color alone then what do you make of albinos? What about tanned people??? I'm sorry CubanoDios, but your views on this issue are simply ignorant at best.

If anything, you've demonstrated questionable views on the different races and racism per se. Anyone with half a brain would disregard everything you've said.

Also, why do you want us to contribute to that Steroid usage article? What are you, part of a viral campaign? This is not the place to discuss that and you know it.

Llorllale ( talk) 22:48, 27 November 2007 (UTC) reply

This is the place to discuss it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steroid_Usage_Amongst_Dominican_Athletes . Just scroll up and follow the conversation. There is no need for personal attacks with the "anyone with half a brain statement" wikipedia has a policy against that. CubanoDios ( talk) 01:21, 29 November 2007 (UTC) Consensus Please locate to me where the agreement was made?? CubanoDios ( talk) 01:40, 29 November 2007 (UTC) reply

Heavy, heavy discussion of this here, here and here.-- Rosicrucian ^Talk 02:03, 29 November 2007 (UTC) reply

Dualldual ( talk) 02:49, 16 February 2008 (UTC) "According to the CIA World Fact Book, the ethnic composition of the Dominican population is, 73% Mixed, 16% White and 11% Black.[2] The mixed population is mostly mulatto with some people indirectly descended from the indigenous Taino.[56][11] Other ethnic groups in the Dominican Republic include Haitians, Germans, Italians, French, Jews, Spaniards, and Americans. A smaller presence of East Asians (primarily ethnic Chinese and Japanese) and Middle Easterners (primarily Lebanese) can be found throughout the population" reply

I've stayed away from this page for a while because it was filled with people who did not want to hear anything different than their views and had no facts to support it but here goes.

http://www.miamiherald.com/multimedia/news/afrolatin/multimedia/vid5.html http://www.miamiherald.com/multimedia/news/afrolatin/part2/index.html

I think we should try to show Dominicans race from a descriptive rather than a culturally biased view. "A walk down city streets shows a country where blacks and dark-skinned people vastly outnumber whites, and most estimates say that 90 percent of Dominicans are black or of mixed race. Yet census figures say only 11 percent of the country's nine million people are black."

"To many Dominicans, to be black is to be Haitian. So dark-skinned Dominicans tend to describe themselves as any of the dozen or so racial categories that date back hundreds of years -- Indian, burned Indian, dirty Indian, washed Indian, dark Indian, cinnamon, moreno or mulatto, but rarely negro." This would explain why non-dominican figures in english do not appropirately represent the population. Many people who are clearly of African descent describe themselves as non-black because black=haitian in dominican. Thus looking at a census a foreigner says negro=black and indian=native/taino but defintely not black However "Using the word Indian to describe dark-skinned people is an attempt to distance Dominicans from any African roots, Albert and other experts said. She noted that it's not even historically accurate: The country's Taino Indians were virtually annihilated in the 1500s, shortly after Spanish colonizers arrived." This seems to be in line with other carribean countries that were taken over by spain and had taino populations. Ie. Jamaica, there are not much Inidans there today.

"Dictator Rafael Trujillo, who ruled from 1930 to 1961, strongly promoted anti-Haitian sentiments, and is blamed for creating the many racial categories that avoided the use of the word "black." "Many black Dominicans here say they never knew they were black -- until they visited the United States."

There seems to be a clear history of how Dominican got to where it is. Ps. Trujillo was considered to be a mulatto by the CIA but from my understanding came from a background where both his parents were of mixed race.