vnç AHistoryofChicano

IdentityandResistance

YolandaAlanizandMeganCornish

Forew

ordbyRodolfoAcuña

ReDLe-r-rePRess•Seattle

©2008by

RedLetterPress

Contents

Allrightsreserved

PrintedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica

RedLetterPress

4710UniversityWay

NE,Suite

100

Seattle,WA98105•(206)985-4621

RedLetterPress@juno.com

www.RedLetterPress.org

FIRSTEDITION2008

Coverdesign:EliasHoltzandJonathanMatas

Bookdesign:HelenGilbert

Coverphoto:MexicanIndependenceDaymarch

inDenver,Colorado,September16,1969.

(DenverPublicLibrary,WesternHistoryCollection,X-21666)

LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData

Alaniz,Yolanda,1950-

Vivalaraza

:ahistoryofChicanoidentityandresistanceI

YolandaAlanizandMeganCornish

;forewordby

RodolfoAcuña.

p.cm.

Summary:

“AhistoryofChicanaandChicanomilitancythat

exploresthequestionofwhetherthissocialmovementisaracial

oranationalstruggle”--Providedbypublisher.

Includesbibliographicalreferencesandindex.

ISBN

0-932323-28-6

1.MexicanAmericans--Ethnicidentity.2.MexicanAmericans--Politics

andgovernment.3.MexicanAmericans--Civilrights--History.4.Civil

rightsmovements--UnitedStates--History.5.Socialmovements--United

States--History.6.Government,Resistanceto--UnitedStates--History.

7.UnitedStates--Ethnicrelations--Politicalaspects.8.Racism--United

States--History.9.MexicanAmericans--History.10.MexicanAmerican

women--History.I.Cornish,Megan.II.Title.

E184.M5A6552008

305.8968’72073--dc22

2007030589

ForewordbyRodolfoAcuña

9Introduction

13AcknowledgmentsbyYolandaAlaniz

18AcknowledgmentsbyMeganCornish

21

Part1.Theory

AnUnconqueredPeople

23

ApproachandTerminology

24

NationandRace:DynamicsandDifferences

28Ascientifictheoryofnationhood

28Thenatureofracism

36TheNationalQuestionandChicanos/os

47Chicanos/os:asuper-exploitedrace

65Thefallacyof“cultural-national autonomy”

71Theoreticalconclusions

78

Part2History

Conquest andResistance

79ThesubjugationofMexico

79TheEnglishcolonies

81Spanishsettlement ofNorthernMexico

82How

theWest wasstolen

83Desperadosandguerrillafighters

90Chicanos/osandtheMexicanRevolution

93

TheSagaofChicana/oIndustrialLabor

97Miningstruggles

98Garmentindustry

battles

107

Chicanos/osandtheClO

114

McCarthyism

118

VWALA

RAZA:A

HISTORYOFCmco

IDENTifY&RESISTANCE

demonstrateuntilU.S.troopswerefinallywithdrawnfromVietnam.In

Los Angeles, Chicana/omoratoriums becameannualeventstocommemo

ratetheAugust1970demonstrationanditsmartyrs.

Theestablishment usedbruteforceinanattempttobreaktheChi

cana/oantiwarmovement becauseitfearedthatarevolutionaryexplo

sionwouldoccur ifthesocialmovementsofthe‘60swereweldedintoa

unitedfront.Theintroductionofculturalnationalistpolitics,however,

provedmoredestructivetounitythanthegovernment’sironfist.

ThecallforAztlán

Ferventshoutsof“ChicanoPower!”and“ChicanoPride!”resounded

duringthelate1960sandearly

‘70s.Theslogansexpressedasurging

racialconsciousnessandadeterminationtoquell Anglodomination.They

broadcast theradical,self-affirmingcharacter of thestruggle.Thoughthese

declarationsofprideandpowerdidnot refertonationhood,manyChi

cana/ostudentsandactivists, alongwithleftwingtheorists, confusedthe

newmoodwithnationalism.

Tosomedegree,thismistakewasunderstandable. Theinspiringmili

tancyofstrugglesfor national liberationinVietnam,Cuba,LatinAmerica

andAfricawaswell known.Thereforemanypeopleassumedthatrebel-

liononthepartofanyoppressedpeopleautomaticallyspelledtheexist-

enceofanation.Butthis isn’tthecase.Aspreviouslydiscussed,thematter

dependsentirelyonwhetherthegroupinquestionisinfactanation.

ChicanoscholarRichardA.GarciadescribedtheconfusionofChica

nopridewithnationalismwhenheobservedthatin“the1960sandearly

1970sMexicanAmericanyouthsbecamepsychologicalandcultural na

tionalistsaswell aspoliticalandideologicalnationalists. Itwasnotuntil

1972thatChicana/oyouthsbegantoattemptadifferentiationbetween

nationalismasasenseofprideandidentity,andasan

“201Un-

fortunately,GarcIadoesnotclearupthematterbecausehecontinuesto

usetheterm

“nationalism”torepresentbothconcepts.

Underthewatchwordofnationalismwerelumpedall advocatesof

anindependentChicana/oidentity.Thisincludedmilitantswhodidnot

desireaseparateChicana/onation,aswellasthosewho

didwanta

sovereignChicana/ostate, somewhourgedreunificationoftheU.S.South-

ITnt

CALL

FORAZTLAN

westwith

Mexico,andotherswhosoughttoisolateelmovimientofrom

outsidestrugglesonthechauvinisticgroundsofChicana/Oexceptioflalism.

Becausethesamewordwasusedtodescribehighlydivergentcon-

ceptSandstrategies,thedistinctionsbetweenthevariousviewpointswere

blurred.But,aswasdiscussedinPart1,ifferentiatingbetweenaninde

pendentidentityaridanatiorto-lexistenceiscrucial.Confusingthetwo

conceptsintroducedcontradictionsinanalysis,

goalsandprogramthat

provedtobedisorientinganddestructivetotheChicana/Omovement.

TheturntowardnationalismwasananomalybecauseChicaflaS/0S

historicallYhaveengagedinmultiracialefforts

or,whennecessary,in

nonsePaIati5t,autonomousorganizing.Theydidnotorienttoseparat

ismuntiltheendofthe19605.Thisshiftwasareactiontorawand

brutalracismandalsoreflectedthestronginfluenceofculturalnational-

ismamongBlacks. ThemagnetofBlacknationalism

Inthelate1960s,after15yearsofgruelingstruggle,alargesectorof

Blackfreedomfightersgrewdemoralized.Themassofwhitesinthelabor

movementhadfailedtocometotheirdefense.Thereformistcivilrights

leadershadnotachievedvictory.RevolutiOfl1e5,suchasMalcolm

X,had

beenslaughtered,jailedandexiled.Deprived

ofkeyleadershiP,many

Blacksretreatedintosingle-iS5ueseparatist,andnarcissisticpolitics.

BlacksocialistTomBoottrenchantlYexplainedtheimpactofthis

developmentontheAfricanAmericanmovement:

Blackmilitantstookthisaudacious[BlackPowerslogan,which

neverotiginY

dealtwithnationhood,andmadeitintoanational-

istsloganimplyingacallforaseparatestate.“BlackPower”was

transformedfromatacticintoamatterofprogramSanditsapplica

tionbecameanexcuseforabstentionfromanddisinterestinclass

struggle.

202

Stymiedmassorganizingledtoafrustratedretreatthatwascloaked

inmilitantposturing.Confrontationwith

thesystem

diminished.Afri

can-StyledasbikishirtsandAfrohairstylesreplacedcogentpoliticaltheory.

BlackmasculinitY

wasglorified;Blackwomenwereexcludedfrom

lead-

189

188

VIVA

LARAZA:A

HISTORYOFCmco

IDENTITY

&RESISTANCE

ershiproles.Feminismwaslabeled“awhitewoman’sthing,“ratherthan

seenasauniversal strugglefor equality.

Withitsappealtoimageandartifacts, Blacknationalismbecamean

overnightsensation,dominatingthemovement—andpoliticallypara

lyzingit.Blackleaderscalledforself-imposedphysicalandsocialsegre

gation,adaptingtoaperspectiveofpermanent isolationthatwasadeadly

mirrorofwhiteracism.

TheChicana/omovement,too,hadsuffereddefeats,andmanyChi

canas/ostookthesameseparatist turn.Nevertheless,nationalisminthe

Chicana/omovement didnot havethesamesteamroller impactithadon

theBlackstruggle.Themovement wasnever aspoliticallyisolatedasthe

groundbreaking

Blackcivil rightsmovementhadbeen.Inaddition,the

UnitedFarmWorkersbattleandother Chicana/olabor strugglesreceived

multiraciallaborandcommunity

supportthatserved

asatremendous

counterweight toseparatism.

But amongstudentsandyouth,whowerelessrootedintheworking

class,thenationalist call waslikeatrumpet blast. It awakenedracepride,

butalltoofrequentlyitshatteredclassconsciousness,violatedmulti-

issuesolidarityandbrought forthreactionarypolitics.

AztlánandtheCrusadeforJustice

Chicana/onationalismfocusedonthecallfor Aztlán—aChicana/o

nation—andwasmost closelyassociatedwith

Rodolfo

“Corky”Gonza

lesandhisorganization,Crusadefor Justice.

“Aztlán”

isanAztecwordmeaning“thelandtothenorth”—pre

sumablytheU.S.Southwest —

whichaccordingtomythwastheoriginal

homelandofAztecswho

latermigratedsouthtotheCentralMexican

plateau.Aztlánwasadramaticsymbol,apowerful imagethatenhanced

unityandpride.Butwasitanassertionthatanationtrulyexisted?Wasit

anemblem

spawnedbyculturalnationalism?Orwasitsimplyameta

phortostimulateChicana/osolidaritythroughprideintheIndianpartof

theirMestizoheritage?

AsthemainstatementofChicana/o“national-

ism,”thedramaticcallforAztlánanditsimpacton

elmovimientoare

worthyofcloseexamination.

CorkyGonzaleswastheforemostadvocateofAztlánandthebest-

ITm

CAU

FORAzUAN

knownRazanationalist,aformerprizefighter,andapoet.Gonzaleshad

coordinatedChicana/ooutreachfortheJohn

F.Kennedycampaignin

ColoradoandforatimeworkedintheDemocraticPartyhierarchyand

federalanti-povertyprograms.Buthegrew

disgustedwiththewayChi

canas/oswerebeingusedand,in1965,heresigned.Hewrotethefa

mousepicpoem,“YosoyJoaquIn”

(Iam

JoaquIn)

,whichwasembraced

bythemovementasanexpressionofprideanddefiance.Itbegan:

IamJoaquIn,

lostinaworldofconfusion,

caughtupinthewhirlofa

gringo

society,

confusedbytherules,

scornedbyattitudes,

suppressedbymanipulation,

anddestroyedbymodernsociety.

..Yes,

Ihavecomealongwaytonowhere,

unwillinglydraggedbythat

monstrous,technical,

industrialgiantcalled

Progress

andAnglosuccess...

Ilookatmyself.

Iwatchmybrothers.

Ishedtearsofsorrow.

Isow

seedsofhate.

Iwithdraw

tothesafetywithinthecircleoflife—

MYOW

NPEOPLE

203

In1966,GonzalesformedtheDenver-basedCrusadeforJusticeand

becameaninfluentialleaderofthenationalChicana/ostruggle.

TheCrusadewasinitiallyabarriocommunity

centerthatpro-

videdsocialservicesandpublishedthenewspaperElGallo.Itbuilta

militant,andtosomedegreeanticapitalist,civilrightsmovementwith

particularappealtoyouth.Thegroupprotestedsegregation,fought

policebrutality,andadvocatedforwelfarerecipients.Itstarteditsown

191

190

VWALARz:A

HISTORYOF

CHICANOIDENTITY

&RESISTANCE

school, EscuelaTiateloco,whichprovidedfreebilingualclassesto300

preschool andelementaryschoolchildren.Becauseofitsmilitancy,the

Crusadesufferedahighlevel of policeandFBI disruptionandspying.

Crusadefor JusticeorganizedthefirstNational ChicanoYouthLibera

tionConference, whichtookplaceinDenver in1969, wherethemanifesto

“El PlanEspiritual deAztlán”(TheSpiritualPlanofAztlán)wasadopted.

ElementsofElPlan

ThePlandeAztlánopenswith

adeclarationofnationhood:

WeDeclaretheIndependenceofour M

estizoNation.Wearea

BronzePeoplewith

a BronzeCulture. Before theworld, beforeallof

NorthAmerica,beforeallour brothersintheBronzeContinent,We

areaNation,WeareaUnionoffreepueblos,WeareAztlán.2°

-‘I

TiwCu.FORAZTLAN

Thisisbeautifulpoetry

—butaBronzeraceandculturearenot

sufficient tomakeanation.Chicanas/oslackaconsolidatedterritoryand

aseparateeconomy,whicharetheessential prerequisitesfornationhood.

TerritorialdispersionpreventsChicanas/osfrom

developing

adis

tincteconomy,buttheplanattemptedtoestablishaseparateeconomic

systemwithChicana/ocooperativessupplanting“foreignEuropean”com

merce(presumablycapitalism).Thisideawashighlyunrealistic.Large

corporateenterprisesrapaciouslyabsorbsmallerbusinesses,whetherco

operativeorprivate,andwilleventuallydominateanyeconomythatis

drivenbyprofit.

Theplanmakestheclaimthatracialsolidarityshouldsupersededi-

visionsofclass:“Nationalismasthekeytoorganizationtranscendsall

religious, political,class,andeconomicfactionsor

an”

205

This

cultural-nationalistview, bysilencingworkingclassprotest as“divisive,”

alwaysbenefitsrulingclassinfluenceswithinacommunity.

Blindtotheneed

forsolidarity

with

othersectorsoftheworking

class,theplanmadeno

callforunitedactionagainstracism

orother

concerns.WhileitdefinedtheChicana/ostruggleasamovementfor

nationalsovereignty,itsconcretedemandsrespondedtotheobjective

needfor Chicanas/ostogainequalitywithintheir ownU.S.homelandby

advocatinganindependent politicalparty, communityself-defense,local

control ofschools, andbilingual/bicultural education.

Unawareof,orunconcernedwith, theobjectivecriteria

fornation-

hood,theplan’sdeterminationthatChicanas/oswereanationrested

primarilyonpossession

ofacommon

race.Butitisclearbylookingat

existingnationsaroundtheworldthat“race”and“nation”arenot iden

tical.Aparticularracemayspannational boundaries;forexample,scores

ofdifferentnationsarecomposedpredominantly

ofAsians,Latinas/os,

Arabs, whites,orpeopleofAfricandescent.Ontheother hand,modern

nationsareincreasinglymadeupofamultiplicityofpeoplesandattempts

torestrict anationtooneraceorethnicityhavebeennotoriouslyracist.

Inconclusion,thePlandeAztlánwascorrect insinglingout raceas

theprimaryunifyingcharacteristicofChicanas/os.Thisisbecauserac

ismisthemainsourceofChicana/ooppression.TheadvocatesofAztlán,

byviewingraceassynonymouswithnation,underestimatedtheimpor

—i.J-_

-jm

..,

c--—---

-

AntiwarpmtestbyChicanoactivistsatthestatecapitol inDenver,Colorado,

1970.Crusadefor JusticeleaderCorkyGonzalesisintheupper left between

thebannerandflag.

192

193

VWALA

RAzA:A

HISTORYOFCmco

IDE4’rrry&

RESISTANCE

TmCn

FORAzTLAN

tanceofraceasaquestioninitself,asasocialconditionthatrequiresits

Ownmethodsofstruggle.

ThesecondNational ChicanoYouthLiberationConferencein1970

triedtofurthertheillusionofAztlánasacorporeal nationbyelecting.

acongresstodetermineongoing“national”policy.Nevertheless,Az-

tlánremainedautopia,accuratelynameda“spiritual”plan. W

ithout a

truefoundationofnationhood,itsadvocatescouldonlycreateadream

vision

ofancient Aztecs.EventheadvocatesofAztlán,whilehedging

their betsastofuturedirections, passedaresolutionattheconference

thatspelledout theprospectthat“theNationofAztlán.

..wouldmain-

tam—atleast forthepresent time—all of itsactivitieswithintheU.S.

political

“206

WomenandAZt1án

Byemphasizingcultureoverclass,Chicana/onationalistsmovedin

aregressivedirectionthatwasespeciallypronouncedinattitudestoward

women.

Whencultural nationalismdeclaresethnictraditionstobesacrosanct,

malesupremacy,anintrinsicpartofeverysocietybasedonprivateprop-

erty, becomesenshrined.InhishistoryofChicana/onationalism, Ernesto

Chavezobserves:

Chicanonationalism. .privilegedmalesandmarginalizedfemales.

As[with]nationalismgenerally, menarecontiguouswith. .thena

tionasawhole.Women,ontheotherhand,haveonlya“meta

phoricorsymbolic

role.

“Thus,carefully

prescribedgenderroles

for bothmenandwomencharacterizedtheChicanomovement.

207

Conservativedefinitionsofculturealsoupholdthemisogynistand

homophobicchurch,abulwarkofbourgeoispatriarchythatdeniesa

woman’srighttocontrol herbodyandsexuality,andassignsherasec

ondarypositioninthehomeandsociety.

Thefamilybecomesaniconinsteadofbeingrecognizedforthe

contradictoryinstitutionitis:ontheonehand,abaseofmutualsup-

portandsurvival;ontheotherhand,thebasiceconomicunitofcapi

talism,requiring

femalesubordinationasthefamily’sunpaidcook,

child-rearer,anddomestic.

Culturalnationalismalliesitselfwiththebourgeoisiebyadamantly

opposingwomen’sleadership.Womenaretoldtostayhomeandraise

babiestopreservetheholy,or—asespousedbysexistleffists

—the

“revolutionary”nuclearfamily.

FranciscaFloresdenouncedthisperspectiveina1971articlein

Regeneración:

Theissue

ofbirth

control,abortions,informationon

sex,and

thepillareconsidered“white”women’slibissuesandshouldbe

rejectedby

ChicanasaccordingtotheChicanophilosophywhich

believesthattheChicanawomen’splaceisinthehomeandthat

herroleisthatofamotherwith

alargefamily.W

omenwho

donot

acceptthisphilosophyarechargedwithbetrayalofourcultureand

heritage—OURCULTUREHELL!

208

Thesexism

inherentinculturalnationalismwasstronglyexhibited

bythe“nation”ofAztlán.AdominantthemeofCorkyGonzales’speeches

wastheroleofthefamily.

209

TowriterStanSteiner,Gonzalesdefined

manhood/machismoasincludingnotonlyhonor,dignity,courageand

honesty,butalsotheability“torunhishouse[and]tocontrolhis

woman.“2

10

Crusade

forJusticehistorianErnestoB.Vigilobservesthat“the

organization’sconservativeculturalorientationcastwomenin‘traditional’

familialandgenderroles:wives,sisters,daughters,sweethearts.“

211This

messagewasmadestronglyatthefirstNationalChicanoLiberationYouth

Conferencewhere,Vigilreports,“Thesocialhighlight. ..wasthemarriage

ofGonzales’oldest

“212TheCrusade’snewspaper,ElGallo,pub-

lishedglowingdetailsofthebride’sattire.

Vigilnotesthatsome“Californiawomen”raisedfeministcriticisms

attheconferencethat“puzzled”themenand“offended”Crusadewomen.

Theircomplaintswerebrushedasideastheworkof“afewwomen

‘intellectuals?“

213

PressureagainstfeminismresultedinaresolutionpassedbyChi

canasatthesecondNationalChicano

YouthLiberationConferencethat

statedthey“wouldnotseparate(pursuewomen’sliberationideology)

194

195

VWALA

RAZA:AHISmRY

OFCnco

IDENTITY

&Risism.iscE

LAAUANzA:Ti-iENiwMixicoLn

SmUGGLE

but wouldremainandstrengthenAztlánandthefamily.”

214

ThoughmanyChicanasfoughtagainstsubjugationbythecultural

nationalists,theirswasalonelyandmalignedposition.

Lashingout attheLeft

AnotherdebilitatingfeatureofChicana/ocultural nationalismwas

itshostilitytowardradicals.Culturalnationalistsview

socialistsasa

threatbecauseMarxistsrecognizetheroleofclassincausingdivergent

interestswithinracialgroupsandalsogeneratinginterracialworking-

classsolidarity.

Gustavo

V.Segade, aprofessoratSanDiegoStateUniversity,color-

fullydescribesthedemagogiccultural-nationalist argument againstMarx-

ism—anddefendsMarxistanalysis:

Marxism. .

.[was]not“our”way.“Our”waywastobeunique,

unprecedented,“bronze.“Marxism

wasonemoredehumanizing

Westernwayofthought.

..[But]complicatedexplanationsof[Az-

tedsymbology

didlittle

toanswertheenormouseconomicand

politicalquestionsofpovertyin..imperialist capitalism. .

..Theclass

analysisrejectstheracistandculturally

exclusivedangersinherent

intheconcept of a

“bronzemestizonation,“andonprinciple,ac

ceptsmenandwomen

asequals,whileMexicanmachismohas

becomesynonymouswithmalesexism.

215

Segadealsorecountsa1974battlebetweenMarxistandnationalist

facultyintheChicanoStudiesProgramatSanDiegoUniversity. Backed

bytheadministrationandcommunitymoderates, theculturalnational-

istsfomentedaredbaitingcampaignthatforcedthehighlyultraleftso-

cialistsoff thecampus.

216

Cultural nationalism’santagonism

towardsocialistswasepitomized

bytheCrusade’sbullyingofpoliticalopponents.OnOctober1,1976, two

Denver leadersoftheSocialistWorkersParty

(SWP)werebeaten

when

theywent toCrusadefor Justiceheadquarterstoprotest threatsagainst a

Chicanoparty

member.Afewweekslater,aCrusadeactivistsmashed

theglassdooroftheSW

Pofficeandoverturnedbookdisplays. Inaddi

tion,theorganizeroftheSW

P-affiliatedYoungSocialistAlliancehadhis

tiresslashedwhilehiscarwasparkedneartheCrusadeoffice.

217

TheSW

PorganizedanationalcampaignamongChicana/oand

Blackactiviststoopposethuggerywithinthemovement.Thosewho

endorsedthecampaignwerepromptlythreatenedandslanderedby

theCrusadeforJustice.

ThoughtheSW

P’sappealformovementsupportwascorrect,itap

pearsnottohavetakenthecustomarystepofseekingtheaidoftheLeft

initscampaignagainstanti-radicalviolence.ThisreflectedSW

P’saccep

tanceofthecultural-nationalistpremise

thatpeopleofcolorhavethe

exclusiverighttoaddressproblemsrelatingtopeopleofcolor.Italso

displaysthecompetitiveandpatronizingpossessivenesstowardtheChi

cana/OmovementthatmadetheSW

?such

afrequenttargetofattack.

TheSW

P’sisolationistdefense,coupledwiththewidespreadacceptance

ofChicana/Oculturalnationalism,preventedmostLeftorChicana/opress

from

reportingtheCrusade’sattacks,eitherbecausetheydidn’tknow

aboutthemorwereunwillingtoraiseunpopularcriticisms.

Ingeneralduringthisperiod,opportunismandwhiteliberalism

kept

mostradicalorganizationsfromofferingamilitantalternativetocultural

nationalism.AnoteworthyexceptionwastheFreedomSocialistParty,

whichopposedtheregressivenatureofChicana/o(aswellasBlackand

female)separatismandputforwardabroadrangeofdemandsthatwere

anti-isolationist,feminist,multi-issueandrevolutionary.

218

SignificantsectorsoftheChicana/omovementalsoputfortharadi

calworkingclassorientationthatwasmoreconnectedtoChicana/owork-

ersthantheelusivevisionofAztlán.

LaAlianza:theNew

Mexicolandstruggle

Thecentury-longbattleofChicanas/OsinNew

Mexicotoregainlands

stolenbytheU.S.governmentresurfacedinthemid-1960s.Theirstruggle

illuminatesanimportantaspectofChicana/ohistoryandrevealsthat

evenji*lewMexico,wheretheclosestclaimcouldbemadetoaChi

cana/Onationallandbase,themovement’s

essentialdirectionwasto-

wardsocialjusticeandeconomicandpoliticalinclusionasU.S.citizens.

Chicana/odescendantsofNew

Mexico’soriginalMexicana/Oset-

tIersdisplaysomestrongfeaturesofanationality.Theyhaveaunique

196

197