My point is that it isn't similar at all, on any level.
A typical foreigner to the US probably knows where some large cities in US are without having the slightest clue about which state many of them reside in.
That is my perception of it.
A typical foreigner to the US probably knows where some large cities in US are without having the slightest clue about which state many of them reside in.
That is my perception of it.
The difference between two neighbouring countries is a huge deal and apparent (regardless if you are a local or not) where you don't even speak the same language, have the same currency (the euro has of course changed that a bit (in Europe)) and for all practical purposes a complete different sets of laws and culture.
The reason for why many cities are notable is because they are the capitals of different countries. Their identity is based on their country. You can hardly say the same about different states in America (to the same extent (of course people that live in America have different accents and prejudices for people in other states etc., but to compare that to different countries?)).
I was referring to this statement. And it is a racist statement. It is exactly as racist as saying "Try Illinois, there are few wetbacks there and fewer all the time." These are clear statements by the speaker that the group in question is both undesirable in general and worthwhile to eliminate or distance oneself from, a belief commonly called racism.
With regard to demographics, few of the thousands of undocumented immigrants likely respond to government questionnaires.
> immigrants likely respond..
Exactly, they are quite underrepresented in the data above, reinforcing the argument. They are in higher concentration the farther south you go.
If you are upset with the word gringo or "fewer..", it was a small attempt at adding levity, perhaps it is a bit flippant.
Your assumptions of my mental state, however, are known psychologically as projection.