Letter to the Editor: There’s Has Been No Betrayal, But Rather Shifting Perspectives

Makayla Cervantes ’26

Contributing Writer

As a diligent follower and supporter of Trinity Tripod’s weekly editions, I have long intended to set aside time to write an article. I never thought my first submission would be a response to the opinion section. Last week’s edition contained the opinion article, “I Feel Betrayed by My People,” which flooded my social media. After reading it, I found myself reflecting on the viewpoint shared and questioning some of the conclusions and assumptions made. I was disappointed to see the article’s generalized stance on the Hispanic bloc in American politics, which claimed that the election results from two weeks ago marked a day of mourning for the “entire Hispanic community.” Yet, this perspective is contradicted later in the article, which cites NBC News stating that “45% of Hispanic voters voted for Trump.” This is not a sudden or misguided shift in Hispanic thought and identity. It is a significant portion — almost half — of the population making a deliberate choice. Author and readers, the Hispanic bloc has not betrayed itself. These voters have consciously chosen the candidate they believed was best.

Political differences among Hispanics have existed long before this election, dating back even before Donald Trump’s first campaign for his 2016 win, and are not solely a U.S. phenomenon. For instance, in U.S. elections, Cuban-Americans have historically sided with the GOP, with 58% voting for Trump in the past presidential election, according to the Americas Society Council of the Americas. This alignment is deeply rooted in the strong anti-Castro sentiment among many Cuban-Americans, shaped by the political turmoil and conflicts in their country of origin. The Republican Party has catered to this sentiment with a firm and open stance against the Castro regime and communism. This resonates not only with Cuban-Americans but also with other Hispanic-Americans from countries with pasts of socialist regimes and dictatorships, who fear the rise of similar policies — a fear the GOP often exploits to create fear mongering against the opposing party.

Hispanic identity and voting attitudes are not monolithic and, in essence, do not always form the unified, distinguishable political motivators we often assume with blocs. Hispanoamerica, encompassing 19 countries in addition to Spain, is large and diverse. Each country has its own political history and conflicts, resulting in varied attitudes toward the economy and social values. As such, Hispanics — whether domestically born or naturalized — span a wide range of political thought and assign different weights to the pros and cons of a candidate. This reality is not about seeking “validation from the white man.” These are individuals with their own distinct and calculated political views. Not every Hispanic shares the same experiences with discrimination. For instance, while I grew up with a previously undocumented parent and my family faced discrimination during the Trump administration, others may not have had similar experiences. Due to this, I placed significant emphasis on these issues, along with my concerns about the alleged effectiveness of Trump’s economic policies, and ultimately voted for Harris, despite having reservations in similar areas. This may differ from other experiences within the community, and rather than castigating others, I recognize this diversity of viewpoints calls for the need of effective dialogue between Hispanic voters. It is through my personal hurt that I have come to understand the harm in reducing people to one narrative.

Reducing Hispanics to a single thought, experience or religion is a dangerous and unfortunate perspective I have often noticed not only among those outside of this pan-ethnicity, but also among many American-born Hispanics and/or Latinos — which is something that must be worked upon. This tendency to oversimplify Hispanic identities prevents us from addressing the complex and often conflicting political views that shape our community. At the same time, we must also recognize the undeniable harm caused by the culture of discrimination that has grown under Trump’s influence. The environment created by his statements and policies, which has exacerbated xenophobia and racial intolerance, has deepened divisions and tensions within marginalized communities, including the Hispanic community. Trump’s rhetoric makes the need for more honest and difficult conversations within our own community even more-so pressing. Instead of ranting and berating or reinforcing a monolithic viewpoint, Hispanic-Americans themselves must first understand and identify these diverse perspectives within the community to engage in more productive conversations and debates to create the change they desire.

All–in-all, this complexity in viewpoints is not new; divisions within the American-Hispanic community predates Trumpism. While some of this current divide has heighted from the intensified debates around “the good immigrant” since Trump’s 2016 campaign, as the author indirectly refers to, differing perspectives have evolved from the distinct political frameworks of their countries of origin and the experiences they then inherently live. In addition, Hispanic voters, like many blocs in the United States, are increasingly voting based on the U.S. economy and U.S. policy toward their country of origin or heritage, which can swing case-by-case on the political pendulum (NBC News). Criticism based on differing values is permissible and central to a healthy democratic society. However, accusing someone of voting solely to cater to another group’s interests, rather than their own, is also open to critique. It’s important to recognize that voters, like anyone, are entitled to prioritize their values and perspectives, regardless of whether we agree with them. In turn, we are also entitled to the right to persuade those with opposing views to reconsider their opinions, creating productive dialogue. With this, I would like to highlight the “Letter from the Editor” from the Tripod’s Nov. 12 edition, which emphasized the danger and ineffectiveness in alienating and cutting people off for their political views. It is natural to fear for the future of your country, and it is your right to use your freedom of speech to express those concerns. What is counterproductive, however, is reducing the wide-span experiences of an already misrepresented community, one that is seldom intentionally understood or supported. It is this kind of ostracizing behavior that has caused those who think differently from you to hide in the shadows, and silently slip in their ballot voting for your opponent.