This is always an interesting topic, and one that from a cultural standpoint I have no reason commenting. That's never stopped me before, and it won't now, either.

I grew up in Minnesota, where the concept of "ethnic diversity" meant "what part of Scandinavia or Teutonia are you from?" Since moving to California I have seen the "latino or hispanic or mestizo or chicano" debate, sometimes heated, up close.

The root "latino" can encompass Romanians, Italians, French, etc. It seems to be the most inclusive of the words, followed closely by "hispanic." The latter can encompass anyone who has even one ancestor coming from the former Roman district of "Hispania." Of course, anyone with a non-quechua surname would most likely fit into this bin.

Mestizo is probably most appropriate since it pays homage to both sides of the Atlantic. It includes the Mesoamerican [frosted] and European [whole wheat] sides. And virmonsal, you're right, chicana does sound the most ionic of the words. There are those who see in "chicano" the equivalent of "MEChA" and militant "brown pride" organizations.

As for me, I suppose if my genealogy to this point is correct, I actually do have "hispanic" roots. Back in the 15th century, a pair of my ancestors consisted of a French priest and a Spanish nun. This of course was prior to the now widely held Catholic belief that celibacy is next to godliness. Of course, that, as they say, is another topic for another forum...

CaliBasco
Who thinks he's working too hard on his MBA, and is grateful to be back amongst the "posters" to MM