Arcángel rejects the 'Latin' label: "We are Hispanic Americans"

Arcángel refuses to be called Latin and reopens the language debate

A top-tier reggaeton artist refuses to back down. Arcángel insists that he is not 'Latin' but Hispanic American, and he has repeated it despite the pressure he has received — much of it from Mexico — according to the coverage of the case. The controversy, which went almost unnoticed in Spain, has peine an old discussion: who invented the 'Latin American' label, who benefits from it, and why a Puerto Rican prefers the word 'Hispanic'.

The issue runs deeper than it seems. Behind a debate over names lies a fight over the narrative: what name defines more than twenty countries, who coined it, and what power imposed it. And it is not a new discussion, even though reggaeton's megaphone has amplified it.

Who invented the term Latin American

The most commonly repeated version places the origin in the France of Napoleon III. The term would have served to justify French imperial ambitions in Mexico during the 19th century, first in the blockade and the so-called Pastry War (1838-1839), and later with the attempt to impose an empire between 1861 and 1867. The idea was to convince Mexicans that the French and the Americans were 'Latins' of the same family, and that the invasion was therefore almost a favor between cousins.

The thesis is not unanimous. Some argue that it was Hispanic American intellectuals exiled in Paris who adopted and spread the label, with a double purpose: to distance themselves from anything Hispanic and to set themselves apart from the Anglo-Saxon bloc to the north. A third school of thought points to the Anglo-Saxons as the real driving force: a term that removed Spain from the equation fit perfectly with 'Manifest Destiny'.

What does seem clear is that the word 'Latin' ended up replacing 'Hispanic' in everyday usage in the United States, where the latter term carried pejorative connotations. The result: a new label for an old identity.

Hispanic America or Latin America: what each side argues

The argument of those who reject 'Latin' is twofold. First, etymological: Latins were the people of Latium, and neither Mexicans nor Argentines come from there. Second, political: the term blurs the Spanish, Catholic and legal heritage shared by Hispanic American countries. 'Hispanic American sounds powerful, of known father and mother, with lineage,' sums up one of the positions circulating.

Against this weighs the evidence that 'Latin' is entrenched in usage, in the censuses and in the media. And that Spanish-speaking America itself has largely embraced it. There are also those who point out that, if the etymological criterion were applied rigorously, not even Spaniards would be Latins. The debate tangles itself up.

The background noise is something else: the discussion about identity sometimes drifts toward rejection of immigration, with arguments that mix cultural heritage and migration policy. That part of the issue has nothing to do with etymology.

Why a Puerto Rican embraces the Hispanic identity

Puerto Rico occupies a unique position. It has been US territory since 1898, its inhabitants are US citizens, and Spanish coexists with English in a permanent tug-of-war. Embracing the Hispanic identity there is not a naming whim: it is a stance on one's own identity in the face of Anglo-Saxon assimilation.

That is why Arcángel's gesture carries a political reading in addition to a musical one. He is not the first: other artists have been adopting the Hispanist discourse as commentators and authors have spread it. The label, once the preserve of scholars, now circulates on the hit charts.

The uncomfortable question remains. If the name matters so much, why did the one its bearers like least prevail?

---