Talk:Anti-Italianism

Source needed (Italian American Internment during World War II)

Italians in internment camps? Is there a source for this? Italian-Americans were among the highest representatives that fought for the USA in WW2.Yukirat 05:26, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

A source is not needed, Italian internment, though not as well known as Japanese internment, is nevertheless a widely known and accepted fact of american history under FDR. --NEMT 21:14, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I think that only those who did not have United States citizenship were interned (unlike the Japanese, where American citizens were also interned). The current wording is a little misleading... AnonMoos 13:16, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

AnonMoos, are you saying that French, Swedesh, Irish, Canadian folks etc - and other notAmerican citizens - were also interned like the Japanese, Italians and ItalianAmericans? Lol, you are funny, mate! Try reading something serious about Anti-Italianism. Yukirat, contact the OSIA, they ll help you to find the sources. --Bigben 16:35, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

What the heck do you even think you're talking about?? Please do try actually reading what I write next time -- it may end up saving effort and creating less unpleasantness all around.

As I rather clearly stated above, my understanding is that only those Italians (and Germans) in the U.S. who were NOT UNITED STATES CITIZENS were detained, while Japanese were detained whether they were U.S. citizens or not (except in Hawaii). Therefore the use of the words "Italian-Americans" in the section is rather misleading. AnonMoos 15:49, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

There were more Germans in the US interned during AND after WW2 than Japanese and Italians combined, but you never hear about it because (1) they're pale white people and (2) they don't have the desire to claim collective 'victim' status that other groups, more inclined towards self pity, do. Then again, if the typical German were olive skinned and brown eyed, they probably would be equally unable to resist the temptation to present themselves as 'oppressed'. The bottom line is, Germans and Italians living in the US during WW2 - even unnaturalized "resident aliens" of belligerent nations at war with the US - were still treated better than US citizens of Japanese origin. The country is named for an Italian (Amerigo Vespucci) for crisakes; Italian-Americans don't have a race card to play. Next case...

Is the "typical" Italian olive-skinned and brown-eyed and hence liable to yield to the temptation to present themselves as oppressed? My, how many things one learns by hanging around in Wikipedia! Notably, that stereotypes are even more frequent than one might expect... Pan Brerus (talk) 01:28, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Oh man the comments in this part make me lose even more faith in humanity. 86.45.32.90 (talk) 19:03, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

La Cosa Nostra

Is this link really appropriate? --NEMT 21:14, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

It has nothing to do. Unfortunately, the racism still exists. --Bigben 16:35, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Alleged anti-Italianism in the United States Democratic Party

This section strains hard, but fails, to draw a general point (that there is widespread, or substantial, or at least notable anti-Italian sentiment in the Democratic Party, and apparently only in the Democratic Party among political parties) by relying on scattered anecdotes that simply do not add up to a pattern of anti-Italianism by Democrats. These few anecdotes--some of them even of questionable anti-Italian intent--are not justification for trying to stick an "anti-Italian" label on the Democratic Party. (Nor, I believe, could one justifiably put a section like this in the article on the Republican Party) Gathering "evidence," like that presented here, is only part of the process; you also have to assess its importance and significance. To use these spindly reeds to suggest something general in the attitude of the Democratic Party toward Italian-Americans is a leap too far. I propose the section be deleted. RickDC 21:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. All of those quotes, even if taken wildly out of context, would not demonstrate any serious anti-Italianism. MorrisGregorian 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

The topic heading should not be anti-Italianism in the Democratic party. However, instead of deletion, the section should be reworked to leave these examples (and add others) to show that public displays of anti-Italianism are seen even in the highest levels of government. This racial stereotyping and innuendo of Italian Americans would never be tolerated, or ignored by the media, if it was directed against most other ethnic groups. The point of the section is misdirected at Democrats but there is value in retaining the core information.--Ana Nim 14:17, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I completely agree, paesan. I find it amazing how people can get away with directing disparaging innuendos and stereotypes towards Italians, when any stereotyping against any other ethnic group would never be tolerated. However, perhaps the title should be changed. --Callmarcus 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Even if the section were retitled and the focus reworked, so that the Democratic Party was no longer the focal point, the scattered anecdotes seem thin proof or even evidence of anything notable beyond the fact that people occasionally say things that can be interpreted as (and sometimes are) "anti-[fill in the blank]" This point could apply to almost any group in society, and to make it here, so weakly, does a disservice to the preceding sections of the article, in which good points are made well. I still recommend that the section be deleted entirely; I don't see a ready way to improve it to the point where it would add value to the article. In any event, certainly the focus ought not to be on one political party. RickDC 23:50, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

PS. As a side note, a Mayor in a suburban New York town (the name of the exact town escapes me) recently responded to questions from an Italian American school board official by stating "Because I don't like guineas." I find it amazing how little attention was given to the incident.

I've retitled the section, to remove the focus on solely the Democratic Party. I've reworded the text. I've also deleted the paragraph on New Jersey, which has no substance to it--just that two Italian-Americans in NJ didn't like Menendez's vote against Alito. I still strongly believe the section should be deleted entirely. It's a weak and insubstantial segment for an encyclopedia article. I've only tried to eliminate its anti-Democratic focus. RickDC 00:48, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

If this is true about Democrats are ethnically biased towards Italians, then the housespeaker Nancy Pelosi is in the wrong political party to begin with...why not switch to the Republicans to sit next to...who else, Rudolph Giuliani? I don't know what political party Mario Cuomo is with (Dems? Reps?), but what about 1920's NY mayor La Guardia...was he a Dem or a Rep? Time to search and find out, but I'm so sorry for Ms. Pelosi represents the Democrat Party and she's an Italian-American! 63.3.14.1 16:01, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, you could easily look it up, although it is well-known that Mario Cuomo was the keynote speaker at the 1984 Democratic National Convention that nominated Walter Mondale. He is an ultra-liberal. LaGuardia was a liberal Republican. Back them both parties had liberal and conservative wings. Italian-Americans have long been known as politically diverse and about equally divided between Democrats and Republicans. This is now true of almost all of the white ethnic groups, even Irish-Americans, but Italian-Americans were among the first. Bostoner (talk) 04:15, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Do we really need such an article?

There isn't a single verifiable statement in this page. I would like to see any evidence for Italian culture being significantly different <<from that of the mainstream identity of white people and Western European cultures>>. And anyway, are racial stereotypes like this worth an article on a reputable encyclopedia? --Fertuno 00:55, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

• There might be claims in this that are invalid, but anti-Italianism certainly existed in US history and the history of a few other nations. See Google books on Anti-Italianism. (I took off Chomsky's because they seem to be irrelevant) I think it'd be better to ask "do we need this article as it is now" or "this article is done badly and needs better sourcing." You can add the appropriate tags to indicate it needs improvement. Some statements I made like a year ago, when I didn't understand Wikipedia as well, are there unaltered and probably need sourced.--T. Anthony 13:49, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

• As an Italian American who has been discriminated against and has had family members discriminated against, I find your statement extremely offensive. Sources can be found for almost everything on this page. You seem to have an agenda. - 16 December 2006 UTC

Offensiveness is a purely subjective matter. As an Italian I rather find offensive someone who says Italian culture <<significantly differs from that of the mainstream identity of white people and Western European cultures>>, which means absolutely nothing and it's probably written by someone who haven't the faintest idea about European and Italian cultures and how each other are related. This is an article about old 19th Century North American stereotypes about Italians, and it fall exactly in those stereotypes. Nothing to be astonished at. So, as long as this is an encyclopedia and nobody produced verifiable sources for that, I'm going to delete it. --Fertuno 12:42, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

How is the truth offensive? Censoring and erasing this page will not bring an end to anti-Italianism, if that's what you think. If you erase this, next it will be the anti-Semitism page, the Racism page, and so on. Just because you have some bizarre shame of the past does not mean we should erase it. Callmarcus 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Have you ever read Wikipedia policies about verifiability?. I'm afraid you don't, because the very first period states that "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth". This is an encyclopedia, draft with scientific method, so you have to provide the truths you add to the article with reliable sources, tipically reputable third-party published sources. That's all. As long as you don't provide sources for your statements, those sentences should go. --Fertuno 10:53, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

A source has been added. Hundreds more similar sources can be added as well. -- The Truthish 17:40 19 December 2006

I will try to point out what I wrote on it.wikipedia about the very same matter: I think the real problem of this article is that it messes two different aspects that are someways linked, but have not the same degree of interest.

• On one side, we have all those terms and phrases that are closer to the commonplace and stereotype about Italians ("thieves, mafiosi, latin-lovers" — etc.). Every country has this kind of stereotypical opinions about other countries. I think it is rude but unavoidable without a proper education. In Italy itself there are lots of stereotypes about other peoples: Romanì are thieves, French people do not wash themselves. There are even stereotypes going from region to region!

If such an article is to be written, I strongly suggest we find evidences in statistical studies about the opinion people from other countries have about Italians. The only kind of evidence I would accept is of the following kind: "out of a sample of 3000 German people interviewed in our inquiry, it came out the stereotype against Italians is that of the criminals".

• On the other side, there is real discrimination. It happens when people goes over a still rude stereotype and act according to their false beliefs about an unspecified group of people that are supposed to share the same characteristics and aspects. When people are discriminated, they are not likely to be employed by other people that belong to the discriminating group and they are even likely to be mistreated, threatened and not to get a rightful judgment when they appeal to a local court. Discrimination could go far and became apartheid when the State itself makes rule in order to legalize such a discrimination and the enforces them with its institutions.

If such an article is to be written, I strongly suggest we find evidences of past and present discrimination: the (true) claim that Italians were categorized as "semi-white" by Australian authorities should be sourced by someone who had a chance to read a survey or is able to show pictures about immigration documents in XX century Australia.
That is to say that even if I have some friends who were beaten and attacked while they were in Edinburgh just because it was "the Italian day" (Friday is UK's payday and some people usually get drunk and threaten violence against tourists or immigrants), I need some article to prove that such a phenomenon is widespread and typical. MarcelloPapirio (talk) 16:42, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

2005 Cronulla riots (Australia)

I disagree with the POV and content of this article in principle. Nonetheless, it exists so I think there should be some degree of fact. I've never been to Australia but I understand that originally 'wog' was a derogatory term for Italians and Greeks. With the increase of immigrants from the middle-east since the 1980s, this term came to be applied to them as well. From what I gather, the riots at Cronulla were not aimed at Italians but represented the growing xenophobia towards Muslims. I modified the article to soften the inclusion of Italians, but perhaps it should be removed completely. Mariokempes 22:57, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I could not find any support for this statement. Removed. Mariokempes 16:54, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I live in Australia and am of Italian descent. The term wog first was used against Greeks and Italians but now anyone from a number of different Southern European countries get the name. Cronulla was against Lebanese after attacks against whites were reported; some say the attacks were actually done by Turkish gang members rather then Lebanese but white Aussies just assumed it was the Lebanese. At the riot both Arabs and any other darker skinned people were targeted. Alexbonaro 04:46, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Flagged for clean up

I've tagged this for clean up due to:

• The presence of uncited direct quotations
• A heavy reliance on weasel words throughout
• Possible original research
• The rather unconvincing assertion that calling a politician "fascist" is an incident of anti-Italianism (consider: Fascist (epithet))

--88.149.173.98 16:54, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Issues that still need addressed (May 2007):

• U.S.-centrism: I'm assuming that the focus on the US (aside from two brief paragraphs) is reflective of systematic bias rather than reality.
• Stereotypes of Italians and Italian Americans: This section probably needs completely rewritten or removed, as it relies largely on weasel words and unverified (and unverifiable) statements.
• Violence Against Italians
  • Find citations for the following:
    • "the second most likely group to be lynched"
    • "the lynching of eleven Italians in the city of New Orleans"
    • ""were nearly deafening"" (Apparently a quote from somewhere)
    • "one newspaper reported..." (direct quote needs cited)
    • S&V were executed partially "due to their Italian ancestry"
    • S&V were convicted "despite the lack of evidence"
  • Weasel words:
    • "most historians agree" that S&Z's trial was unfair; How many are most? Who says this, when do they say it, and where do they say it?
• Italian American internment during World War II
  • "One official stated..." (indirect quote needs cited)
  • "Bill Clinton made a public declaration" (would benefit from citation)
• Anti-Italianism in politics
  • Weasel words:
    • "It was argued..."
    • "was seen by some of his supporters"
    • "Opponents of Alito's nomination countered..."
    • "which some interpreted as an ethnic slur"
    • "which was also interpreted by some as a derogatory"

--Ringtail Jack 14:17, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Clinton and the "Mafioso" comment"

The article had been edited to state that "President Bill Clinton once referred to Governor of New York Mario Cuomo as a "Mafioso". This is incorrect on several levels. First, he was not president at the time of the comment. Second, Clinton himself never used the word. In response to a comment by Gennifer Flowers that "I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't have some Mafioso major connections," then-Governor Clinton said, "Well, he acts like one." Here is one of many sources quoting the exchange: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE3D71438F933A05752C0A964958260 I think the exchange still has a place in the article, but it should be done to correctly reflect Clinton's comment.--Ana Nim (talk) 13:32, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Quota

It should probably be noted that the 1921 (and, later, 1924--See Emergency Quota Act and Johnson-Reed Act) quota regarding the number of Italian immigrants allowed into the US applied not only to Italians, but to all immigrants from the Eastern Hemisphere. This quota was put in place largely as a result of post-WWI US isolationism-- as well as anti-Chinese sentiment (and, later, anti-Japanese sentiment) following the downturn of the 1848-49 Gold Rush in California--in fact, the 1924 Act specifically barred all Asians from entering the country. How the article reads now implies that the quota was specifically targeted at Italian immigrants, a grossly misleading insinuation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.49.252.53 (talk) 15:39, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Correct, the immigration act was a result of increased nativist sentiment among White American, esp. that of "WASPs" against foreign born persons entering to live or work in the USA. Also during the 1920's and 30's was a spike rise and fall trend of Mexicans and Puerto Ricans, two other nationalities who are "Latino" began to be treated alot worse than older established or "lighter skinned" European immigrants (white ethnics) to indicate the complete acceptance of them such as Italians. During the gold rush, there were Chilean and Peruvian miners in the Californian coasts and sierras that encountered mob violence and expulsion from neighborhoods, in part of anti-Mexican and xenophobic feel among white Anglo Americans there. + 71.102.12.55 (talk) 10:03, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Guinea (ethnic slur)

Guinea (ethnic slur) redirects here, but there's no mention of that in this article, other than a pointless link to that redirect. It looks like that this has been the subject of an incomplete transwiki to Wiktionary here. We need to resolve this, not least so as I can figure out who's who in The Departed. -- 87.112.6.240 (talk) 23:41, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Bump? Bpdlr (talk) 17:10, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Anti Italianism in Yugoslavia

There was wide spread Anti Italianism at the end of WW2 with regards to the slavs when they invaded and occupied Istria and then Trieste for a month. During this time many Italians were murdered and thrown into Foibes (caves), this was known as the Foibe Massacres. Also during this time 300,000 Italians were forced to flee their homes due to Yugoslav persecution. Rodolfo Graziani (talk) 17:31, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm... 'anti-Italianism' bad, 'anti-Irishism' and 'anti-Germanism' good?

This article is a joke and REALLY needs to be deleted. Amongst its many faults, as it asks us to take note of alleged widespread bigotry against Italians, it shamelessly slanders the Irish and Germans as bigots! This is nothing but an expression of Italian-American bigoted stereotypes about others. This article is clearly the work of ignorant, bigoted, cafones; the article suggests some over priveleged, under witted Italian-Amerian kids have had their minds destroyed by 'whiteness studies' propoganda. LOL. Or Cry out loud, I'm not sure which is more appropriate.

The country is named for an Italian, for crisakes. Stop your whiny bitching. I thought Italians were supposed to be tough guys? You P.C. identity politics victim mongers make me ashamed to be of Italian descent.

P.S.: The article actually refers to “U.S. Americans” at one point. SIGH! :( Modnartag (talk) 02:20, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

The social status of Italians in American society is generally positive and not to sound like CNN's Rick Sanchez commenting on "Jews had it better than blacks or Latinos in the USA", there is less avert prejudice or discrimination against Italians in this country, but I don't deny it does occur on occassion. You could refer them as a model minority in the same fashion given to Asian-Americans, esp. Indians and the Japanese, two other ethnic groups experienced a harsher type of racism based on skin color and racial appearance in American history. + 71.102.12.55 (talk) 09:59, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Racism in Italy

Would there be a page somewhere to examine the allegations of racism in Italy in recent times ? There have been major riots against Romanian minorities. Some have also reported historical or current discriminations against Blacks, Jews, Arabs and others. ADM (talk) 08:17, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

I meant to respond that I created such an article and placed it in "see also."--T. Anthony (talk) 18:36, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Italians are not dark skinned

I have always noticed that Americans use to portrait Italians, Greeks and Iberians as dark or olive skinned. That's not true. Only very few Italians from certain territories in southern Italy have LIGHT dark skin, because they probably have arabian people among their ancestors (because of the islamic invasion of southern Italy between 827 and 1091). I am Italian and surely my skin is white. I ask to remove every reference in the article about Italians being dark skinned, because this is a racist statement that dates back to the beginning of XX century, when it was introduced by anglo-americans in order to justify racism against the italian immigrates coming to the U.s.a.

Speaking of racism in Italy: i don't know what they say to you about my country, but in Italy there have never been "riots" against strangers, but only pacific demonstrations of protest against them (I'm not going to explain the reasons behind these protests, as it would be too long). However this article is about racism against italians not about italian racism, which is dealed about in other articles. It's sad thinking someone aim to include in this page news about italian racism: it seems to me a way to justify racism against Italians ("we are racist against italians, but they are racist so they deserve it!"). Very sad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.36.133.11 (talk) 17:15, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm Italian and I have dark skin, but I'm not ashamed of it. What's wrong with dark or olive skin, which many Mediterraneans possess? 68.36.66.79 (talk) 22:17, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

There are lighter-skinned Italians in the North. Some paintings from Renaissance Florence show light-skinned red-heads and I don't think these were all fantasy images. However I believe Italian immigration to the US tended to be more from the Southern half of Italy. Argentina, as I recall, received more Northern Italians in per-capita terms.--T. Anthony (talk) 09:44, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Mediterranean populations are by and large 'olive skinned.' You need not look further than the populations of Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal and France to determine this. The existence of olive skin in Italian populations could stem in part from the fact that much of Southern Italy (I'm including Sicily here as well) was colonized by another Mediterranean people- The Greeks. I cannot speak of what the native inhabitants looked liked when the Greeks arrived in Southern Italy. However, they were probably olive skinned considering the fact that they were a stone's throw away from Greece and that they were situated in the Mediterranean as well. However, that is conjecture. Northern Italians may be deemed fairer due to influences from Germanic peoples. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thegz1 (talk • contribs) 16:21, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

In Souternh Italy are all black...but Souternh Italy was conquered by Vikings (descendants)...but ...wait...what i see??!!1 also England was conquered Vikings (descendants)....but then we could say.......please stop with these bullshits!!!

Viking expansion

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Pasq789 (talk • contribs) 11:45, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

File:Clines.png

Example of genetics : Cavalli-Sforza's 1st Principal Component:A cline of genes with highest frequencies in the Near East, spreading to lowest levels northwest.

The distribution of the V-13 sub-lineage of haplogroup E1b1b in Europe.

This map is not true. The guy who made it confused the Vikings with the Normans from Normandy. The yellow colour refers to the Normans in the south of Italy and in Sicily, but they were only a few hundreds. Further genetic researchs show clearly that the populations of southern Italy and Sicily are not related to the population of Normandy (and further of the Northern part of France).Nortmannus (talk) 21:55, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Curtis Sliwa's Comments

Curtis Sliwa, on his nationally syndicated radio show stated that Italians don't need an Italian American museum, because it will be run by the Mafia. He also stated that he could swing a cat in there and every fifth person he hit would be mafia. Moreover, he claimed that 'museum contributions' will be made because mafia enforcers will request it once you walk in. Again, this story is a matter of fact, not fiction. Moreover, the sources are highly reliable and the information provided here is neutral. Along with the story of Sliwa's comments is Sliwa's letter of apology, where he stated that he did not intend for his comments to be an attack on the Italian community.

What if he made the same idiotic style of commentary about the Holocaust memorial Museum and the National Civil Rights Museum? Silwa would been sued, fired or even charged with group libel against Jews, African-Americans and other groups fought for civil rights or were victims of the Nazi genocide. It is convenient or "less controversial" to make a comment degrading Italian-Americans for Silwa to jack up the radio show's ratings. It is no longer "taboo" to pick on Italians for having an ethnic heritage, compared to attacking people of color and other religions, but the results are the same and Silwa has offended Italians for being "different". + 71.102.12.55 (talk) 09:55, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

This whole Sliwa issue is ridiculous; do any of you realize Sliwa is himself Italian and often refers to his Italian heritage with great pride on his frequent media appearances and radio program? I thought quote mining/cherry picking was forbiddwn at Wikipedia? What a farce. He often makes barbs about the mafia because he has been repeatedly threatened and was once allegedly shot by mobsters (John Gotti Jr. was tried for ordering the hit, though was acquitted). This article is blatant original research; I have never seen the term "anti-Italianism" anywhere else but this page and one or two highly opinionated books by activist academics involved in ethnic studies curricula. Encyclopedic articles deal in facts, not opinions or political agendas. The term seems obviously to be inspired by the term anti-semitism. This article really doesn't belong in an encyclopedia. The whole concept of 'anti-Italianism' is dubious. The discrimination faced by some Italian immigrants early in the 20th century was directed at eastern and southern European immigrants in general, not just Italians. This strikes me as a blatant effort to float the idea that Italians should be considered an 'oppressed minority' like blacks or Hispanics, which is absurd. I say delete the article or merge it into an article about discrimination in general. 'Anti-Italianism' represents original research and is not appropriate for an encyclopedia or Wikipedia's guidelines. This isn't a place to coin new terms. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CannotFindAName (talk • contribs) 02:55, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Jersey Shore Controversy

The largest Italian American organizations have come out stating that MTV's use (the network itself used the term) of the term Guido to describe a group of Italian American cast members was derogatory, offensive and a mass propagation of an ethnic slur against Italians. There is little to no evidence that the term Guido has been 'adapted' to be an acceptable way to refer to an Italian. The word's historic use is that of hatred, and continues to be. The use of this term in MTV's promos which were scripted with voice-over work (not the use of the word by cast) is the exact definition of anti-Italian. All quotes and statements have reliable, trustworthy sources and should not be removed. The statements are neutral and reported as facts, not opinions. If Rev. Wright's 'Garlic Noses' comment is to remain in the article (as it very well should), MTV referring to Italian Americans by an ethnically derisive term should remain in place as well.

If the validity of the sources is to be judged- there is a link to the letter the NIAF mailed directly to Viacom (MTV's parent company) denouncing the use of the term Guido to describe the cast. Moreover, there are Fox News and CNN reports on the statements made by the Italian American group UNICO on the subject of the Jersey Shore. If someone is to remove this information, which again has been presented in a neutral, bare-facts manner, they are the ones injecting their opinion into the structure and substance of this article. We cannot treat the MTV controversy as just a blip on the radar. It is not a personal story about how someone called one individual a guido-it is major, national, headline news. - signed by anon IP

The liberal media claims they are fighting racism and group stereotypes of all kinds, including that of Italians. You could have mentioned in the 1970's there was some protests about the Godfather movie trilogy depicted Italians were highly involved in organized crime. But the movie was primarily received warmly in the Italian community, since the movie was directed by Francis Ford Coppola of Italian descent and based on the novel by Italian-American writer Mario Puzo. But ironically, Marlon Brando was not Italian, except the film's Don Corleone character has a human not caricatural feature of a person from an Italian culture. The movie displays with accuracy no exaggerations and some of the characters spoke Italian or Sicilian dialogue with subtitles in the film. The major difference is that you won't find seriously offensive material about Italian people whether are American or from Italy, on The Godfather movie trilogy, while Jersey Shore is completely an act on what's depicted a "reality show" though not intented to be offensive portrayals of Italians, Jews, people from New Jersey or New York. + 71.102.12.55 (talk) 09:53, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

This article is a perfect example of why many people question the reliability of Wikipedia. The alleged prohibitions on original research and biased POV are a joke. Claiming that the term 'guido' is an ethnic slur against Italians is like saying 'redneck' is an ethnic slur against WASPs.

Redneck isn't an ethnic slur aimed at W.A.S.P.s. Redneck is an ethnic slur aimed at Scots, or just Scottish-Americans and maybe Scottish-Canadians. W.A.S.P.s are English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.130.201.84 (talk) 21:26, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

This isn't an encyclopedic article, it's transparent identity politics propaganda. Virtually all of the 'references' are from political Italian-American activist organisations and cranky identity politics academics from ethnocentric 'ethnic studies' programs. These are hardly objective sources. An article like this might be appropriate for a liberal journal of 'critical race theory' or 'whiteness studies' but not a fact based encyclopedia. Virtually everything in the article stated as factual is entirely speculative and debatable.

The notion that the term 'guido' is an ethnic slur is ridiculous. It refers to a pan-ethnic, predominantly white ethnic youth subculture that was initially inspired by John Travolta's character in the 1977 film “Saturday Night Fever” which fueled the 70s disco craze. Though most guidos are Italians from the northeast, its never been an exclusively Italian thing. A guido was originally someone who emulated the look of Travolta in SNF and preferred disco/dance music to rock and the long haired rocker look.

Cultural revisionists with an Italian-American identity politics agenda are trying to promote the idea that its an ethnic slur. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CannotFindAName (talk • contribs) 15:58, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Christ Crucifixion reference

I am removing (for a second time) the concept that some responsibility for Christ's crucifixion was a source of anti-Italianism in the period of mass immigration. I have done a Google search to see what I could find on this issue. The only thing that comes up is the Wikipedia article. Furthermore, the cited reference "La Storia" makes no mention at all of this. Philantonia

POV Alert

I am removing the NPOV alert placed by an anonymous contributor on June 24, 2011. Given that this anonymous contributor has not made clear what the basis is for raising this alert, and since I do not share this opinion, I am removing it. If the anonymous contributor, or anyone else, wishes to reinstate the NPOV alert, I believe they should make known their concern so that the article can be modified to reflect their concerns. Philantonia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philantonia (talk • contribs) 17:26, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Anti italianism bad antiserab good? I don't get it is it some kind of lobistic thing. You wrote on serbophobia page how antiserbian and serbophobia was created during 90. Now I am not of those nationalistic serbs but during my 20 years of life all I hear is bad thins abouth my people and aqbout people like italinas who had Al Capone Napoleon Musolini and all those criminals including Nazi pope etc etc you speak all good. Anti serbian is created during five centuries of slavery. I'm not proud to be a Searb because I know serbs mena slave, but c'mon people I'm bombarded wit lobistic preeching...Not to mention Belrusconi a man who has 90 years and molest young girls... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.222.64.150 (talk) 15:22, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Citation Flag Removal

I have removed the citation flag alerts which have been there since April 2010, and Aug 2010. Neither of these alerts were ever justified, or have been previously questioned. Given the very substantial modifications that have taken place since the time of the alerts, I thing they may no longer be applicable. I think the fair and constructive approach is to identify specific areas where further citations are needed, and insert a "reference needed" alert. Philantonia (talk) 17:13, 23 September 2011 (UTC)Philantonia

File:Speak American WWII.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Speak American WWII.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests - No timestamp given What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:07, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Italians versus Italian Americans

I see a problem in this article, and a major one. It is named after Italians, but it really deals with Italian Americans. The two are not the same -- although they certainly share a few ancestors.

Americans tend to use the word "Italian" promiscuously for both groups. But Italian Americans are a subset of the American people, not of the Italian people. Italian Americans eat purely American food like fettuccini Alfredo (invented in Rome, granted, but never again to be seen in Italy) and spaghetti and meatballs. They don't usually speak Italian (and few Italians speak English like native speakers). And those among them who were in the Army around 1941 fought on the opposite side than Italians.

Italians and Italian Americans have a few things in common -- they're all humans, first of all. And many of the prejudices the article deals with have their origin in one group (rightly or wrongly) but are brought to bear against the other as well. They may share some family names. But they form two groups, not one.

Possibly, the article should be split?

The image of Italy's Italians with other nations has evolved a good deal in history. The negative traits ascribed to them have not stayed the same in the last two centuries -- and they are not the same as those reproached to Italian Americans in the US. Even though the latter may have arisen from some interpretation of Italian traits.

Definitely, there should be two articles. What do you think about that? Pan Brerus (talk) 01:58, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

I don't think the topic warrants even one article. Who uses the term "anti-Italianism" outside perhaps an Italio-centric ethnic studies class? We can stick the prefix "anti-" before and the suffix "-ism" after any ethnic group's name (i.e. "anti-Belgianism", "anti-Swedism", "anti-Russianism", etc.) and look for incidents of alleged 'oppression' but we don't because they are not recognized categories of unique discrimination. It's fairly obviously inspired by the term "anti-semitism". Anti-semitism is a real phenomeon that is universally recognized and has a long history. There are certainly instances where Italians have been discriminated against, but never in the sustained or systematic way that, say, Jews or blacks have been. Virtually all of the discrimination experienced by Italians in the US was limited to the early 20th century and had more to do with a broader discrimination against immigrants and Catholics than with Italian-ness. You won't find "anti-Italianism" in any real encyclopedia nor in any dictionary and the fact that some obscure ethnic studies academic might use the term doesn't lend it authenticity or raise it above the level of original research.

I'm going to recommend it's deletion, or at least that the article be retitled something more appropriate, such as "Discrimination against Italians". Honestly, even that is a pretty thin topic for a dedicated article. It's more appropriate material for a subsection of an article about discrimination in general or discriination against immigrants or Catholics.

CannotFindAName (talk) 14:26, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Italians were certainly systematically discriminated against. Are you serious? The quotas in higher learning institutions for the amount of Italians admitted, the strict quotas for Italians admitted into the country, the fact that Italian neighborhoods such as South Philadelphia were redlined. They were the second most lynched group in American history. Discrimination against Italians in America is very real and very specific to Italians. I would say anti-Catholicism and nativism were the least important reasons for Italian discrimination. The article completely glosses over the fact that Italians have been and are considered "swarthy," dark-skinned, non-white undesirables. Anti-Italianism revolves around specific cultural and physical traits of Italian. Anti-Catholicism, though deeply entrenched in American society, does not explain all of the prejudice Italians have faced in America. As Southern Europeans/Mediterraneans that look and act completely different from the Northern European Anglo majority culture in North America, Italians have more trouble assimilating and being accepted into American culture than the Irish and other Catholic immigrants. Your whole comment is honestly offensive. There are countless books dealing with Italian discrimination and anti-Italianism in America. I would hardly call the subject "obscure." It is a well-known phenomenon to many people that have lived in areas with large Italian-American populations or have any knowledge of American ethnic politics and history. In response to the original comment, your assertions are ridiculously exaggerated. Italian Americans do not eat "purely American food." Italian Americans are largely Southern Italian, and they usually eat Southern Italian cuisine with some modifications due to American influence. If you are not familiar with Southern Italian cuisine, or your only experience with Italy is a vacation in Florence, I could see where you would be confused. Furthermore, the stereotypes of the "tamarro," "truzzo," and "terrone" in Italy are nearly identical to the stereotypes of Italian-American "goombahs" and "guidos." I think you are seriously exaggerating the difference between Italian stereotypes and Italian-American stereotypes. hmm (talk) 17:04, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

To be systematically discriminated against means to be victimized by policies written into law that specifically target that group. There was never any such systematic discrimination against Italians. The country is named for an Italian. It's a country in which the Italian Christopher Columbus was and continues to be celebrated as an "American hero" (as in US) in celebrations initiated by 'Anglos' long before there were Italians present in the country in any significant number despite the fact that he lived and died hundreds of years before there was a US and never stepped foot upon what would one day be US soil. Italians were never classified as non-white; this is a hyperbolic exaggeration made by 'whiteness studies' academics (who also claim the Irish, Swedes, and Germans were once regarded as 'non-white'). See Thomas Guglielmo's "White on Arrival" for a well known and oft cited volume that soundly refutes this claim (Guglielmo is a liberal whiteness studies academic).

As far as Italians being considered swarthy, this is simply a factual description of the phenotype typical of Mediterraneans, no more discriminatory or bigoted in itself than describing the English as pale. If anything it reflects a Eurocentric perspective inasmuch as even the 'swarthiest' Italian would be pale as perceived beyond Europe. Nevertheless, your claim that Italians "look and act completely different from the Northern European Anglo majority" is a weird generalization that only serves to highlight your own bigoted and stereotypical views of Italians and "the Anglo majority" (there actually isn't an "Anglo majority" in the US).

Uh, yeah, the U.S. does have an "Anglo" majority. The English make up the largest ethnic group in the country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.130.201.84 (talk) 21:28, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

There were never any quotas limiting Italians at universities. Like the contrived term "Anti-Italianism" itself, which is inspired by the term "antisemitism", this simply an attempt to create a model of Italians as a long suffering oppressed group that appropriates aspects the Jewish experience in the US. There were quotas limiting the number of Jews enrolled at elite universities in the past intended to prevent their being disproportionate represented relative to their percentage in the general population (a practice universally acknowledged as immoral despite its striking similarity to quotas restricting Asian enrollment at universities today championed by progressives). In any event, this section is intended for comments relevant to the article itself; it's not a thread on a blog intended for debate between editors over things not directly related to the article. Cheers. CannotFindAName (talk) 22:13, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Dubious Allegations of 'Anti-Italianism'

The section entitled "Italian-American Stereotyping" contains quite a few questionable allegations of 'anti-Italianism'. I removed the following because it is by no means clear that it is an example of "Italian-American Stereotyping":

• A campaign ad against former Illinois treasurer Alexi Giannoulias, a Greek American, uses unflattering stereotypes of Italian-Americans and concludes that “Tony Soprano would be proud of Alexi Giannoulias”.

It is not uncommon for politicians to invoke hyperbolic rhetoric in campaign ads (e.g. Romney is a murderer). Tony Soprano is an iconic American character; a politician assailing the character of his opponent by suggesting a fictional gangster would like him is hardly an obvious case of Italian-American stereotyping. The candidate in question isn't even an Italian-American (even if he was it would still be quite a strained accusation). Is any reference to The Sopranos inherently 'anti-Italian'? Frankly, I find the whole notion that mafia movies or references to them are inherently 'anti-Italian' unconvincing.

The 'article' fails to recognize that Italian mafia movies have replaced "the western" as the staple of American outlaw cinema; references to it are inevitable. It also fails to recognize that, however distasteful it may be, Americans tend to look upon the Italian mob in general and certainly the fictional mob portrayed in many movies and in The Sopranos as chic, sexy, and 'cool'. Many Italian-Americans and non-Italian-Americans alike will falsely boast of being 'connected' or knowing someone who is to impress people. Sure, when it comes to noteworthy Italians, one would prefer that people thought Galileo was cooler than the fictional Tony Soprano but that just isn't the case.

Also, I left the Curtis Sliwa allegation, but added the critical piece of information that Sliwa is himsef Italian-American and proudly so, as anyone who has ever heard his broadcasts can testify. Frankly, the suggestion that a proud Italian-American is anti-Italian is somewhat absurd. In fact, I think the whole article is somewhat absurd. It comes across more as special pleading to consider Italian-Americans an oppressed group akin to blacks and Latinos than a dispassionate encyclopedia article. It seems more political than encyclopedic; the article has an agenda, which is Italian-American identity politics.

I also find the suggestion that a broadcaster opining that Andrew Cuomo's presidential prospects might be hurt by his ethnicity is 'anti-Italian' or 'stereotyping' to be both dubious and ironic in the context of an article which seeks to portray the Italian-American community as a despised minority. Cognitive dissonance? That said, I don't think the broadcaster's statement makes much sense in a country that elected a black president (a black can get elected president but an Italian couldn't?), has had a Native-American vice president (Charles Curtis), had a Jewish running mate on a ticket that won the popular vote in 2000 (Gore-Lieberman) and (until recently) an Italian-American speaker of the house. Nevertheless, the broadcaster's statement seems sympathetic towards Italian-Americans, not antagonistic.

I want to nominate the article for deletion because I don't think it's encyclopedic. Even the term "anti-Italianism" itself is contrived and rather obviously and awkwardly inspired by the word "antisemitism". I've searched extensively for instances of this word both online and off and have found it only in the rhetoric of political Italian-American activist organisations and cranky identity politics academics from ethnocentric 'ethnic studies' programs. It is not a term that anyone outside the tiny realm of Italian-American identity politics activists and academics would be familiar with. Not the sort of thing that should appear in an encyclopedic article. If other American white ethnic groups were to follow this model Wikipedia would be littered with articles entitled "Anti-Irishism" and "Anti-Germanism" and "Anti-Polishism" in short order.

Italians have been discriminated against as have many other groups, but they don't have the same history of persistent widespread oppression that groups such as Blacks, Jews, and Native-Americans have experienced. It seems a topic worthy of perhaps a subsection of an article on discrimination in general rather than a dedicated article. The only reason I haven't formally nominated the article for deletion is (1) Frankly, I don't know how [Wikipedia has all sorts of great easily accessible info on just about everything EXCEPT how to do things like this, ironically] and (2) I think it should be discussed first; maybe a compromise can be arrived at. At present, this seems more like original research and activism than an encyclopedic article. CannotFindAName (talk) 16:32, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

References

Use of Ethnic Slurs as "See Also" Entries

Recently, an anonymous editor Paraloco reverted my deletion of ethnic slurs used as “See Also” entries. As an editor, I find the use of such slurs offensive, as I believe many other who are directed to the article via a link from the Italian American article would also.

Paraloco’s use of ethnic slurs in the article cannot be regarded as encyclopedic but, rather, what one might expect in the Urban Dictionary. More importantly, it is contrary to the standard of respect which Wikipedia strongly urges on the part of editors. Does Paraloco believe a very questionable and nonconstructive edit to the article is more important than the sensibilities of other editors and readers, who would consider the use of ethnic slurs offensive? The edit also clearly raises the issue of whether Paraloco observes Wikipedia’s strict NPOV policy. Perhaps Paraloco can provide a rationale for the edit. Philantonia (talk) 07:17, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

It is of considerable interest that Paraloco made the following statement in an edit to the Sinophobia article on September 12, 2012, which removed references to Chinese ethnic slurs:

“No other -phobia page includes a section on ethnic slur. It lowers the threshold to use the terms and should be considered hate speech.”

Yet, about 4 months later, on Jan 21, 2013, Paraloco introduced a whole assortment of ethnic slurs into both the Italophilia and Anti-Italianism pages (as a “minor” change in each case). More recently, Paraloco did exactly the same thing again. One can only assume that Paraloco's motive is to vandalize these two articles. However, this Talk page may be used to explain the motivation for these edits, if indeed such an explanation exists. Philantonia (talk) 03:36, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Poor Soldiering Stereotype

The article says that the idea that the Italian soldiers didn't do too good of a job was inaccurate but the infobox in the Operation Compass article would say very much otherwise. 86.45.32.90 (talk) 19:07, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

no brasil houve sentimento anti italiano na zona de sp por outros grupos tanto quatrocentões quanto comuns eram tidos como vigaristas gatunos etc daí a palavra carcamano etc — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2804:14C:DA94:730:1966:7948:6C0:E65E (talk) 00:37, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Albanophobia which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 06:45, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Anti-Italianism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120316173316/http://icue.nbcunifiles.com/icue/files/icue/site/pdf/1514.pdf to http://icue.nbcunifiles.com/icue/files/icue/site/pdf/1514.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150510215558/http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/organizedcrime/italian_mafia/ to https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/organizedcrime/italian_mafia

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:59, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

no brasil tambem houve sentimento anti italiano na guerra e não só em sp carcamano era sinonimo de trapaceiro 171 ludibriador malandro que não presta desonesto gatuno etc — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.82.158.158 (talk) 05:45, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Anti-Italianism in the United Kingdom

I added a reference to the claim that thousands of Italian men between ages 17 and 60 were arrested after a speech by Winston Churchill. However, the reference was found through a quick Google search that appeared to be the only source of this information. If possible, can anyone else find another source of this information? Thanks. Sirkablaam^Talk 11:03, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Anti-Italianism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080907171941/http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2001/0103bt.asp to http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2001/0103bt.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:15, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

"Playing the victim" vs. learning from history

In response to some of the comments here, I just want to say I think it's important to document the history of prejudice against ethnic whites, such as Irish and Italian immigrants, precisely because the descendants of those immigrants are no longer affected by it. It's instructive to know that people who looked like you - perhaps even your own ancestors - were once treated with the same contempt and fear that Latin American immigrants and Muslims are today. When you know that there were people who considered your great grandparents - who passed their DNA down to you - inferior, maybe you'll think twice before disparaging another group, and be more likely to give them a chance. --MopTop (talk) 02:03, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

A little late here, but I dare say no one cares what you "think" is important. This is a space for improving the article, not moralizing and making naive generalizations -or, worse yet, falsely equating the historical difficulties faced by European immigrants with contemporary issues of racial minority groups. I agree with some of the comments up top that this article could use more nuance, and to that end I'd offer Joseph Healey's sociology textbook that devotes a whole chapter to white ethnic groups and assimilation.[1]. Some context currently missing from this article:

“Without denying or trivializing the resolve and fortitude of European immigrants, equating their experiences and levels of disadvantage with those of African Americans, American Indians, and Mexican Americans is widely off the mark.. These views support an attitude of disdain and lack of sympathy for the multiple dilemmas faced today by the racial minority groups and by many contemporary immigrants. They permit a more subtle expression of prejudice and racism and permit whites to use these highly distorted views of their immigrant ancestors as a rhetorical device to express a host of race-based grievances without appearing racist.” Jonathan f1 (talk) 05:24, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Anti Italianism in Australia

So in the article I see references to italophobia in America, Britain and France but why is there no mention of Australia? Anti Italian sentiment was high in Australia for much of the 20th century. 108.208.70.47 (talk) 16:23, 17 November 2021 (UTC)