19 December 2012
21 September 2012
16 September 2012
The New Indian Wars
Professor Rudy Acuna of
California State University Northridge widely acknowledged as the godfather of
Xicano Studies writes in his crucial book “Sometimes There is no Other Side: Chicanos and the myth of equality”
that “The threat of Chicano history is its political dimension,”[i] a dimension that could provide Acuna tells us, when allowed or encouraged, an
oppositional paradigm to white hegemony. He goes on reminding his readers it
is human nature “to participate in history.”[ii] That Xicanos are and should be the creators of their own history and that the
“acquisition of historical consciousness means learning the ‘discipline of
memory’ … identifying your personal and community interests.” Professor Acuna
warns us, “A false collective memory facilitates subordination.”[iii]
It is this call to
‘participate in history’ that characterizes Acuna’s writing on Chicano history
and creates the setting within which he situates the “real” purpose of Chicano
studies. Drawing from this example those of us involved in organizing in the
Xicano community need to begin challenging our own stock assumptions about
building power through mobilization and education Acuna explains the
necessity of understanding paradigms and their importance to the struggle for
Xicano studies and participation in history when he writes
Kuhn,
at the height of his popularity in the 1960s and again in the 1970s,
popularized “paradigms,” the theory that in every field of study the
established order sets structural guidelines that influenced the thinking and
actions of its scientists and social scientists. The concept holds in this
context, existing paradigms restrict the growth and expansion of the new and
competing models.[iv]
Since by their nature
paradigms are incapable of disbanding themselves we can deduce it is only
through physical, social and intellectual struggle that existing paradigms can
be overthrown or supplanted. Since struggle against power is not an activity unique
to any one group of people or scholars, it is safe to say as a movement we
must explore alternative methods of community mobilization, testing the
revolutionary nature of our struggle and working to decide what direction our
struggle lies.
Given the inherently oppositional nature of competing paradigms
we as Meso American people need to decide what we want. Is it really “Occupied
America” as Professor Acuna has stated? Is there really ‘Pedagogy of the Oppressed’
as put forward by Paulo Freire? Because if the answer is YES and it really is
YES – then that is a fundamental challenge to the right of rule by Western
Europeans on this continent. Even
in terms of trying to express these ideas as part of a multi-cultural project
that seeks greater inclusion through understanding – poses a danger for the
United States that lies in the un-reconciled treatment and history of
indigenous people.
In 2004 Samuel P. Huntington (now deceased) the chairman of the
Harvard committee for International Affairs, member of the Tri-Lateral
Commission and author of books of Clash of Civilizations and Who We Are wrote an
article titled “The Hispanic Challenge” for the journal “Foreign Policy” which
he co founded in 1970. In this article among many other things Huntington
clearly states,
No other immigrant group in U.S. history has asserted or could assert a historical claim to U.S. territory. Mexicans and Mexican Americans can and do make that claim. Almost all of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California, Nevada, and Utah was part of Mexico until Mexico lost them as a result of the Texan War of Independence in 1835-1836 and the Mexican-American War of 1846-1848. Mexico is the only country that the United States has invaded, occupied its capital—placing the Marines in the “halls of Montezuma”—and then annexed half its territory. Mexicans do not forget these events.”
Like any model or
practice the way we think of organizing our communities for political struggle,
the way it has be taught to us and explained to us must be reexamined and
rethought. The question that must be on all of our minds as we enter in to this
next phase of struggle center on our true desires for ourselves as a nation. There
may be some listening who are thinking to themselves that I sound stupid even
saying something like that. Maybe. But there are some things I agree with Lou
Dobbs, Bill O’Reilly and Samuel Huntington about. Xicano Studies does smacks of
rebellion. Occupied America makes me want to fight. There is a tone of disavowal
in the title alone that makes it a dangerous book.
As a people, as an
indigenous nation we can no longer afford to sit on the fence of our own
history. Amilicar Cabral[v] the Papua
New Guinea liberationist as the keynote speaker for the Eduardo Mondlane Speech
at Syracuse University on October 14, 1970 said in that speech titled “National
Liberation and Culture” / “the national liberation of a people is the regaining
of the historical personality of that people, it is a return to history through
the destruction of the imperialist domination to which they have been
subjected” (Cabral, p. 7).
Like all
soldiers/scholars of third world national liberation struggles Cabral
understood the actual return to history (cultural reawakening through a
national liberation struggle) is subjective in that each national liberation
struggle along with the strategies to victory is by necessity unique to the
country where the struggle originates. This does not mean however, that lessons
cannot be learned or shouldn’t be taken from other national liberation
struggles.
Heightening
Contradictions is a strategy to
prepare for confrontational tactics[vi] / Organizers
educate the community with the aim of involving them in confrontations to win
demands. This preparation is predicated on education and the development of
critical thinking skills. Across the world revolutionaries have used this
tactic to dramatize differences around them. It is the basis of Mao’s famous
“war of the flea” so described by Robert Taber (1964) in his book of the same
title where Taber writes / “The flea bites, hops, and bites again, nimbly
avoiding the foot that would crush him. He does not seek to kill his enemy at a
blow, but to bleed him and feed on him, to plague and bedevil him, to keep him
from resting and to destroy his nerve and his morale.” Metaphorically speaking the heightening of
contradictions is the breeding of fleas.
Because of this idea I
want to talk about a way of organizing we have be exploring and developing over
the past decade. We have studied, examined and attempted to copy, to the extent
it is possible, the mobilization structures and practices of successful
national liberation movements from around the world.
First I want to say – I
am not a Maoist. I am an admirer of his military genius. His social policy left
something to be desired.
According to Edward L.
Katzenbach, Jr., who served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State under
President John F. Kennedy, in his influential essay on the military theories of
Mao Tse Tung the three tangibles of warfare are: “the weapons systems …
instruments of war that have given a sole possessor a moment of military
supremacy. Second, there is the supply system, logistics in the broadest sense.
… and, third, there is manpower.”
Mao chose to develop his
revolutionary theory focusing on the three intangible aspects of warfare:
space, time and will, “the basic premise of this theory is that political
mobilization may be substituted for industrial mobilization.” Mao’s military
problem was how to organize space so that it could be made to yield time. His
political problem was how to organized time so that could be made to yield
will, that quality which makes willingness to sacrifice the order of the day …
Mao’s real military problem was not that of getting the war over with, the
question to which Western military thinkers have directed the greater part of
their attention, but that of keeping it going.
Today, within this slowly
emerging indigenous Xicano movement we suffer from unrealistic expectations
about the roles and activities we should be undertaking at this point in our own
national liberation struggle. Space + Time = Will is an important equation from
Katzenbach’s analysis of Mao’s guerrilla theory that can help place our own
movement within realistic context of what constitutes appropriate action at
this juncture. As we examine ideas and events that must be developed we have
the opportunity to decide for ourselves how we will do that.
Mobilization of the People: Happens through political organizing and
education around a clearly articulated cause. This articulation happens over a
period of time when the insurgent chooses a cause, in this case the cause of
national liberation, that they “must, of course be able to identify himself
totally with … or more precisely, with the entire majority of the population
theoretically attracted by it.” (David Galula, a French lieutenant in the
Algerian War who became counter insurgent specialist and wrote the classic
foundational military text “Counterinsurgency”)
Protracted War: the goal of the revolutionary is not to produce a quick military
decision but rather “how to avoid a military decision” according to Mao in the
beginning of a revolution there is merely a struggle for the minds and
allegiance of the people through political education. (Taber, 49)
Only fight when victory is assured: It is a waste of time and resources to engage our
opponents in a losing battle. We squander precious time and money defending
ourselves in court with unnecessary arrests and involvement with the legal
system. Wasting valuable resources, which should rightly be directed toward
building the will of the whole people rather than making a personalized
political statement.
Pick targets in advance: This demands that we know our targets. It means
planning, organization and determination. It means that we have thoroughly
studied and understand those that oppose us and that we have committed
ourselves to opposing them.
Use Psychological Warfare: This of course means that you know and understand
the principles of Psychological Warfare. It means that you have developed an
organization that has stop responding to aggression and is being directed by a
Meso-American agenda determining its own direction.
Equip your forces from defeated enemy forces: Within the context of our struggle this could mean
so many things. How are students at universities using those resources to
promote the struggle? How are we using our own education to equip our forces?
Is it everyone for themselves or are we using every piece of equipment we have
gained from our colonizer to bolster our position?
Employ Unconventional Forces and Tactics: Training is key. It is not enough to be young an
energetic. If your sixteen-year or son or daughter came to you and said I want
to get married and start a family – you would be alarmed to say the least. The
same is true in our struggle for justice. The idealization of youth as the sole
factor in social change must end. It is a sickness that has been foisted on our
communities by our colonizers. Another example would be arrests. Being arrested
as a means of protest cannot be our default nuclear option. That is a tactic,
which served an important purpose at one time. It is also important to remember
the goal at that time was to fill the jail. If you can’t fill the jail then
taking an arrest is an act of vanity, which far to often takes the emphasis off
the movement and places it on the individual arrested stealing time, energy and
resources.
Use overwhelming force: Always remember the phrase – We came to win. This
statement is relative. Sometimes one lone person standing up to be counted can
by the force of their moral presence create an overwhelming force. That is a
rare and exciting moment. For the rest of the times make it 10-1. Overwhelming force is just that. What
will it take to make this happen? Again planning, research and organization is key
to winning. Know the details. Plan it out. Mao tells that if we are to know the
ways of revolution then we must make revolution.
Avoid a military decision: Our job is to stay alive – physically and
metaphorically. The longer we can keep a situation going the more chance we
have of winning. This system (outside of the courts) demands quick resolution
in terms of damage control. This is one reason why as a movement for a better
world we must turn our backs on issue orientated organizing. The inherent
challenge though for those fighting for indigenous liberation in the Americas
is the responsibility of protracted struggle. This means a lifetime of
struggle. It means that the crushing desire on the part of civil society to
placate and smooth over problems is the dominant discourse and it takes
tremendous effort to resist this very human tendency toward settling conflict.
Understand the equation of “space+time=will”: Examining the history of guerrilla warfare is
important in developing new avenues of resistance and in correctly discerning
the present situation of the Xicano movement. Based on the acknowledgement of
industrial inferiority the Vietnamese people and leaders approached the
development of political will in their war with the French and the United
States, as necessary to national survival. While the French and U.S. “were
fighting to control the national territory … the guerrillas were interested
only in winning its population” (Taber, 66) this being the essential
distinction between conventional and guerrilla warfare “the army fights to
occupy territory, roads, strategic heights, vital areas; the guerrilla fights
to control people, without whose cooperation the land is useless to its
possessor.” (Taber, 66)
In other words, a people’s
war produces military power as a consequence of the political mobilization of
the people by the army. This is why Vietnamese General Vo Nguyen Giap wrote the
main responsibility of a peoples war is first to “educate, mobilize, organize,
and arm the whole people in order that they might take part in the resistance” [vii]
they form a peoples army which according to Mao “is not an instrument of the
state, but the essence of it, its spirit, its life and its hope”.[viii]
Third World liberation
theorist and revolutionary Frantz Fanon outlines this confrontation when he
wrote, “The last battle of the colonized against the colonizer will often be
that of the colonized among themselves,”[ix] certainly
the political crisis of a colonized people moving toward national liberation
while building alternative political and educational structures that facilitate
change and support indigenous resistance to colonization is the inevitable response
of that people’s “return to history.”[x]
Fanon’s description of the phases of literary development native or colonized
people must pass through before they arrive at the moment of national
liberation is unmistakable. He writes / the three distinct phases of
intellectual development conquered people must go through are,
“first
phase, the native intellectual gives proof that he has assimilated the culture
of the occupying power … second phase we find the native is disturbed; he
decides to remember what he is… Sometimes this literature of
just-before-the-battle is dominated by humor and allegory; but often it is
symptomatic of a period of distress and difficulty … the third phase, which is
called the fighting phase, the native having tried to lose himself in the
people and with the people, will on the contrary shake the people”. [xi]
Xicano/Indigenous
scholars and organizers working toward a frame work of national resistance are clearly
situated within the context of Fanon’s writing when he says “at the beginning
the native intellectual use to produce his work to be read exclusively by the
oppressor, whether with the intention of charming him or of denouncing him
through ethnic or subjectivist means now the native writer progressively takes
on the habit of addressing his own people.” [xii]
Xicano and Indigenous scholars and
organizers are once again “addressing” their own people, moving toward a period
of intellectual development in opposition to their colonization that Fanon
calls the “literature of combat, in the sense that it calls on the whole people
to fight for their existence as a nation.” [xiii]
This fight for existence
is expressed through the indigenous sovereignty of the Xicano people in the
United States and is the foundation of true social and political change for
Xicanos and other Indigenous people. “Low intensity organizing” endeavors to
build intentional communities within greater communities. The motivating force
behind low intensity organizing is to constantly challenge the status quo as to
the treatment and economic status not only of Xicanos and other indigenous
peoples but all oppressed peoples. After a thorough study it becomes obvious
that resistance begins with education, organization and preparation. People
must take ACTION on a regular basis not just in times of crisis.
Low
Intensity Organizing as a paradigm promotes the creation of dual power systems.
Until we work to build institutions that serve our community we will be locked
into the dominant reactionary activist/protestor paradigm constantly playing
out the role of the squeaky wheel. Every facet of the community must be
mobilized or attempted to mobilize. In practice Low Intensity Organizing would
follow the same guidelines as Low Intensity Conflict (LIC) the emphasis being
on:
1.
political considerations with the stress on ideology and ideals including
propaganda and psychological operations;
2.
non-organizational and organizational mechanisms are brought into play;
3.
“conflict is viewed as a long-term endeavor and therefore strategy and tactics
must be flexible and adaptive.”
This
model of low intensity organizing is completely opposite of traditional methods
of community and labor organizing. In particular, communities, regardless of
race or class, working for change have been derailed over and over again by
reformist issue mongering and needs base organizing. National liberation
movements are the only proven method to defeat the rich and powerful.
LIO
should begin to build what Fanon termed a “new revolutionary culture”[xiv]
to replace our existing colonial culture and its twisted institutions. It is not
that our community lacks organization. We have countless reformist
organizations that seek “change” through accommodation with the dominant power.
Our community lacks the resolve to construct new paradigms after being beaten
to this position of submission during 500 years of occupation. So as a reaction
to our own submissiveness we fixate on the reformist idea of self-defense and
in doing so fail to understand “self-defense does not aim at military supremacy
for the exploited and consequently does not aspire to organize itself.”[xv]
What is our objective then? Clearly it must be the “conquest of political
power.”[xvi]
Protracted low intensity organizing based on the principles of revolutionary
political mobilization could in time generate enough of a challenge to colonial
U.S. hegemony that effective movements of national liberation could be created.
The
primary goal of low intensity organizing is to politically educate the people since
it has been shown that no substantial change or action can be supported to its
conclusion without the understanding and support of the community this is the
first step. Education and an understanding of their/our personal relationship
to the superstructure are paramount.
Xicano scholars like so
many others today with the proof of a small but growing cultural, political and
physical resistance in plain sight continue to down play the reality of nation
by employing liberation rhetoric solely in terms of identity and personal
development. The role of the intellectual in creating nation, culture and
resistance is important as Fanon writes, “a nation which is born of the
people’s concerted action and which embodies the real aspirations of the people
while changing the state cannot exist save in the expression of exceptionally
rich forms of culture.” [xvii]
This is the core concept many scholars and organizers fail to comprehend –
nation and culture go hand in hand. If you are involved in the creation of
Xicano culture, you are integral to the creation of the Xicano nation. These
are dynamic processes that move the people toward their goal of liberation.
Even more amazing and certainly in the long run
much more dangerous in every way possible is Arizona State Bill 2281 passed the day after State Bill 1070 which allowed police
to stop, question and search anyone looking like an illegal immigrant. House
Bill 2281 now ARS 115-10 bans the teaching of Ethnic Studies at any school
receiving state funds. In other words Arizona legislatures are telling Xicano
very explicitly – not only do we not want to see you, we want to erase your
memory forever.
SB 2281 is a good old fashion mind control bill
written and passed exuding the bona fide WASPish common sense of American
culture wars. In part the legislation, “Prohibits a school district or charter
school from including in its program of instruction any courses or classes
that:
- Promote
the overthrow of the United States government.
- Promote
resentment toward a race or class of people.
- Are
designed primarily for pupils of a particular ethnic group.
- Advocate ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of pupils as individuals.”
So this means the first 200 years of European
history on this continent is coming out of school books? How do you teach about
slavery and indigenous genocide without promoting resentment in groups of
people?
Both of these laws and their wording have been
discussed endlessly on blog and news forums for the past several days so I’m
not going to do any textual analysis of either. To me this whole thing is
obviously a continuation of US immigration policy directed toward Mexicans since
1848. The fact that some Chicano/Mexicano representative supported the two
Arizona bills is only evidence of the colonial project and its success among
the indigenous population.
The main problem in all of this is that as these
events unfold it appears the wide spread political analysis on the part of the
Xicano/Indigenous Community is that we have to find ways to interact more
aggressively with and hold our elected officials MORE accountable. We need to
VOTE screams the liberal bloc! This voting will fix everything reasoning brings
into question a number of logic lapses as to what exactly the purpose of voting
and the law is in terms of the State.
1. The purpose of elected
officials is to uphold the law. In all societies and particularly those where
civil society is strong the law always acts to preserve The State and its power.
Arizona State bill 2281 does just that.
2. Maintaining an
ideological control over a conquered and colonized populations is paramount to
the continued economic exploitation of that group of people. Any type of
studies programs that offer ‘alternative’ or what I would call holistic
versions of history are inherently oppositional to the ‘common sense’ version
of history taught to generations of US school children and therefore seditious.
3. Law is not about
justice or equality. Law is about preserving the power of the state. It is
impossible to legislate either justice or equality. It follows that the force
of law then cannot work in any way but to preserve the state. All so-called
‘civil rights’ laws passed have been reformist at their core. Their function
was to protect the order of society.
So why the inconsistency
in terms of understanding the role of race in our society? Increasingly we are
bombarded with the suggestion we live in post racial world. That the
multicultural society we see around us is transcendent in its ability to
redefine the relationship of colonizer and colonized. After all, we have
managed (it seems) to put our racial differences aside to elect a Black man for
the first time to the presidency. All the racial harmony aside how do we read
the fact that at one point in the last four years Facebook’s fastest growing
group was ‘1 million praying for Barack Obama to die.’
For Xicanos, Latinos and other Indigenous peoples
there is no post racial, post colonial or post brown. We continue to be The Other
in this equation where certain facts are real. Brown culture, without brown
bodies, is welcome. Brown labor, without permanency, is welcome. Brown self
determination and thought is not. They want us strong, pliable and most
importantly SILENT.
Acuna writes about this
pseudo race neutrality means to Xicano Studies and confronts what it means to
dismiss race in the United States when he says
As in Plessey, the courts today have created a doctrine – the
color-blind test – that effectively avoids judgments and defers to the status
quo. The policy of color blindness promotes racial neutrality, prevents
race-conscious remediation, and thus encourages racial discrimination. It
expresses the concern that affirmative action creates unfair advantages for
minorities. Then, paradoxically, it stereotypes minorities, promoting tribal
politics and restricting genuine opportunity (Acuna, 32).
At the point we find
ourselves now, which is a point in time of thought and action where the issue
of the survivability of Xicano Studies rightfully come to the forefront. Even
with the seeming victory of identity-based politics within the academy there
still remains a vibrant thread within Xicano studies advocating the overturning
and examination of our colonized state (instead of our allegedly miscegenated
blood) through an anti colonial framework that keeps alive the spark of
resistance in our community.
Of course, those of us paying attention know it
isn’t Mexicans from Mexico who are asserting a claim to anything. No, our
cousins from the south are innocent of these charges. The real culprit
promoting this irredentist position is Xicanos born in the United States.
Remember these words?
With our heart in our hands and our hands in the soil, we declare the independence of our mestizo nation. We are bronze people with bronze culture. Before the world, before all of North America, before all our brothers in the bronze continent, we are a nation, we are a union of free pueblos, we are Aztlan (El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan).
Aztlan? And you may ask who believes in that crazy
old 1960s Chicano hippy stuff anymore anyways? I’ll tell you who – Samuel P.
Huntington, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly, Tom Horne, John
Huppenthal, ICE agents and the people who run Homeland Security just to name a
few.
Maybe, what we should be
asking ourselves is why White America takes Xicanos learning their history and
culture as way more threatening to their sovereignty and much more seriously than
we do? White lawmakers have proven how seriously they take Xicano Studies. Ask
Sean Arce and Jose Gonzalez both Tucson Unified School District teachers who
are literally battling for their families and homes because they are effective
Xicano studies teachers. Ask them how serious our colonizers are about Xicano
Studies. Ask them.
University Presidents
who tell Xicano students trying to better their program that “Xicano Studies
doesn’t belong to [Xicanos] it belongs to the university” is further proof of
the deep contradictions of inclusion that continue to work against Xicana’s and
Xicanos / paradigmatically blocking the idea of Xicana/o ownership in their
studies programs. And, as long as we as a community refuse to accept that
nation and culture go hand in hand this lack of ownership will never facilitate
a return to history. We are trapped forever in the past, a conquered people
with no future and no discernable meaning.
The struggle in the United States for Xicano
studies is a typical struggle in that it required huge personal sacrifices from
many people over a long period of time. Out of that struggle came real ideas
about nation, identity, and Indigeneity discussed in this article. The question
that remains and that will continue to plague us until we deal with the power
issues created by a colonial system center on the questions of ownership. Who
does Xicano Studies belong to? What is the purpose of Xicano Studies? Who
really owns the land?
It isn’t Mexicans that
are dreaming of Aztlan, its Xicanos born, raised, baked brown and fired rock
hard in this oven of “color blind racial neutrality” that are dreaming of a new
and better world. Mexicans are just trying to get out of Mexico. The real issue
here is who controls the minds and hearts of the people. Who gets to tell their
story and how do they get to tell it. My question, and I feel it is an
important one, is once this law banning ethnic studies starts to pass all over
the country like the affirmative action propositions have – then what?
[i] Acuna “Sometimes there is no other side: Chicanos
and the myth of equality”
[ii] Ibid.
[iii] Ibid.
[iv] Acuna (1994) “Truth and Objectivity in Chicano
History” Voices of a new Chicano/a History Eds. Refugio I. Rochin and Dennis N.
Valdes
[v] Cabral was the Secretary General of the Partido
Africana do Independencia de Guiné e Cabo Verde. He was assassinated January
20, 1973.
[vi] Omatsu
[vii] Giap, Vo Nguyen – Inside the Vietminh
[viii] Katzenbach, 17
[ix] Fanon, Frantz (1963) Wretched of the Earth. Grove
Press, New York, NY.
[x] Cabral
[xi] Ibid
[xii] Ibid.
[xiii] Ibid.
[xiv] Fanon
[xv] Debray.
[xvi] Ibid.
[xvii] Fanon, Frantz (1963) Wretched of the Earth. Grove
Press, New York, NY.
14 September 2012
Oct. 12 is a National Day of Solidarity with Tucson
Support the struggle for Mexican American Studies in Arizona! Organize a house party/fundraiser on Oct. 12 and defend freedom of education in the United States!
13 September 2012
The Difference Between a Political and a Pedagogical Judgments White Lies And What’s to be Done?
 |
| Roldofo F. Acuna |
I guess I never grew up, a lie remained a lie. When I started to write commentaries in the 1980s this got me into trouble with many of my politico friends. They told me that what they said were not lies but political judgments. The first rule in politics, they said, was to get re-elected.
In L.A., I began to lose friends not only because I had to tell it like I saw it, but because as a writer and historian if I got caught in a lie, my moral authority suffered and this undermined the purpose for writing. At first it was easy because I concentrated in exposing the injustices in the system. But as Mexican Americans and Latinos became part of the system I found myself criticizing my friends.
The issues that caused me the most anguish were police brutality, education and Latino politicians taking large sums of campaign funds from the likes of Downtown Real Estate Attorney Richard Riordan and developer Eli Broad. When I criticized them mutual friends would say that they were making “political judgments” and that to be successful and remain players that they had to make these sorts of compromises.
I could not live with the contradictions so I distanced myself -- unwilling to make a complete break because there were issues where they got it right and benefited the community.
I literally got sucked into the controversies in Arizona. I have been interested in the abuse of immigrants there since the 1970s with the Hanigan Case where a well-connected rancher and owner of a Dairy Queen and his two sons tortured three undocumented Mexican workers. It infuriated me that the state court would not convict them.
My interest peaked in the 1980s with the sanctuary movement and the trial of my friend and poet Demetria MartÃnez for transporting two Salvadoran undocumented workers. Demetria was acquitted but a 25-year sentence hung over her head and that bothered me.
The persecution of undocumented workers picked up in the late 1990s as the government closed the corridors carrying drugs and poor Latin Americans into the United States from Baja California and points south. The tactic was inhumane, forcing immigrants to travel through the badlands of Southern Arizona, which was dominated by right wing ranchers who would hunt down the Mexican workers and their families.
What they could not “roundup,” the boiling sun would kill. To date way over a thousand Mexicans and Latin Americans have died on the hot sands of southern Arizona—a thousand fold more than died trying to get across the Berlin Wall.
SB 1070 was passed in 2010. It brought an immediate reaction both inside and outside Arizona. A boycott was called, which quickly dissipated. For a time, unions and progressives outside of Arizona held rallies in Phoenix. However, Arizona’s anti-racist campaign was quickly eclipsed as struggles in Wisconsin and Ohio took center stage. Not wanting to offend local contributors the Democratic Party turned the other way and allowed Blue Dogs and others to make their arrangements as political judgments dictated their choices.
A few progressive writers uncovered the motivations behind 1070 for which many people claim credit. Kansas attorney general Kris Kobach who considers his anti-immigrant crusade a substitute for military service was one of the hooded authors. Most claim that the impeached Senator Russell Pearce was the author of 1070, which was signed into law by Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer (R) in April 2010.
Meanwhile, other than the legal strategy – from my perspective – much of the outrage over the law leaked from the punctured balloon. More and more political judgments were made. Politicians of all stripes hardly mentioned that Pearce was only a bag man. The mainstream media forgot that the authors of the bill were the Corrections Corporation of America (CCA),and the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC); they drafted SB1070 “to protect the profitability of private prisons funded with taxpayer dollars.”
Special interests made a killing on the hate Mexican campaign. Hate was and is profitable.
As an early blogger commented “SB1070 cannot be separated from its drafters, whose sole mission is to craft profitable legislation. The purpose of a state criminal designation for undocumented people is the diversion of immigrants into for-profit prisons and a tax-subsidized holding period before federal immigration proceedings can proceed. Not only was the law never about Arizona, it wasn't even written by or for Arizonans.”
ALEC must be remembered controls at least 50 Republicans in the Arizona State Legislature and has ties with elites throughout the country and state including the Southern Arizona Leadership Council. Its drive to privatize Arizona was made possible by a culture of fear.
HB 2281 was passed shortly after SB 1070; from the beginning from the beginning it has been eclipsed by the latter. Unfortunately most if not all politicians make political judgments, which are not necessarily made to improve society. In the case of education they are certainly not based on sound pedagogical considerations.
I have been an educator for almost sixty years and my first question is, how does this improve the education of Mexican American, Latinos and other students? Education is my vocation.
If Arizona had made a good faith effort to educate Mexican American and other students I would have given them the benefit of the doubt. However, Arizona is 50th in per capita spending per child in the nation. It has been under a court order to desegregate for over thirty-five years. The highly respected Tucson Unified School District Mexican American Studies Program was created in 1997 and was funded by a Federal Desegregation order and the product of decades of struggle.
Despite this and the closing the Rincon and Palo Verde high schools, the firing of more than 100 teachers and a low approval rating, the TUSD Board of Education last month renewed Superintendent of Schools John Pedicone’s contract through June 30, 2014, which will pay him $211,000 a year plus benefits and allowances plus a $35,000 bonus. This is in a city where the cost of living is very low.
This is the same Pedicone that dismantled the MAS program, which Latino politicos have sacrificed on the altar of political judgments. The lives of several MAS teachers have been destroyed, which makes it all the more tragic because those making the political judgments were supposedly friends of the fired teachers who had worked on their campaigns.
This mendacious political judgment was predictable. The Board was stacked just after Democratic pro-MAS board member Democrat Judy Burns died and was replaced by Republican anti-MAS Alexandre Borges Sugiyama. There are rumors of fraud: Sugiyama had not shown previous interest in education – he unqualified.
A five member committee made up of all white Republicans recommended his appointment. His only qualification was that he was a part time instructor in the same Department as Board President Mark Stegeman and he was approved by Pedicone. The latter two have ties to the Southern Arizona Leadership Council. The Pima superintendent who is part of the Tucson Ring made the appointment.
If this was not enough, Pedicone had ordered excessive force against community activists. Professor Guadalupe Castillo, a longtime friend of many of the Latino politicos, who qas approaching 70 years old was thrown to the ground by police and arrested. So much for familial and fraternal ties and loyalties. I guess it was a political judgment because it was certainly not a pedagogical one.
This abuse of power has turned off some of the best students who now have become cynical about government. It is difficult for them to distinguish a political judgment from a lie.
In speaking to students and parents they are dismayed at the numerous instances of abuse of power.
For example, in January there was a White House summit for Latino education. Sean Arce, the coordinator of MAS, attended and testified. Normally this conduct is protected by the whistleblower statute. However, Arce was admonished by his superiors and shortly afterwards fired for criticizing the system.
Students and parents also criticized the TUSD’s infamous censorship of books. At the forefront of these abuses were Stegeman and Pedicone who were licensed by state and local elites. Thus they make no pretense at fairness or explaining their actions in pedagogical terms. Rather Stegeman like Tom Horne and John Huppenthal sees MAS a conspiracy to reconquer Arizona. Stegeman made the outlandish claim that he knew MAS was a cult when he heard them use farmworker handclap.
I wonder what significance he gives to white students clapping to Freddie Mercury’s “We Will Rock You!” at a University of Arizona football game.
However, with this said those concerned about HB 2281 have to accept some of the blame for the political judgments. As I have said before Arizona ushers in a new era. To deal with this new reality we must adopt new strategies:
We have known for some time that Arizona was coming, and we should have adapted. Places like Tucson are isolated and do not have the internal structure that Los Angeles, for instance, has. If a national organization is not going to help, it should at least hold workshops for potential plaintiffs. Having gone a large discrimination suit, a rule of thumb is that the plaintiff(s) control the case, not the attorneys.
Nothing is gained by calling a politico a vendido (sellout). This cuts communication. The important objective is to win or make your case. Palo dado ni dÃos lo quita. People remember what they perceive as insults.
We must always keep in mind that the case is not personal but represents the interests of the community.
Working with Salvadoran groups in the 1980s I found them much more focused than Mexican American organizations. Run mostly by women they insisted that the meeting begin on time. No drinking or smoking was allowed and you could only speak if recognized. They had a purpose which was the liberation of El Salvador.
We have to learn and constantly reassess our tactics.
As I have often mentioned, my mother did not complete the first grade, she was legally blind and anemic. Because of the Mexican Revolution my father completed the fourth grade. When I went out they would tell me never to soil the family name –that’s all we really had.
People can make mistakes but when it comes to education, I hold myself to a higher standard. It is my professional judgment that kids are being hurt by Pedicone, Stegeman and company. However, to be effective I have to stay focused and continually ask myself what I am fighting for?
Arizona should be ashamed of itself and so should professionals such as myself who have not learned from the past.
-----------------
Depositions begin this week in the case against HB 2281. You can donate by clicking on to http://saveethnicstudies.org/ . We are run entirely by volunteers; however, depositions are expensive. Please donate at least $5 a month.
Depositions have started in the case against Sean Arce and José González. Four hours of depositions were taken of both Arce and Gonzalez. Our side deposed Ward this past week. Please donate: https://www.wepay.com/donations/144408
10 September 2012
Browning of America - Olmeca - No Papers, No Fear - Ride for Justice Blog
Browning of America - Olmeca
September 01, 2012
Olmeca Offers Advanced Preview of Upcoming Album in "Browning of America" Track
to Support No Papers No Fear Ride for Justice
to Support No Papers No Fear Ride for Justice
As Undocumented Riders Arrive at DNC, Hip-Hop Artist Olmeca Sends Saludos and Releases New Track
Los Angeles, CA
Inspired by the undocumented participants in the No Papers No Fear Ride for Justice, Hip-Hop artist, Olmeca, offers a sneak peak of the track "Browning of America" from his upcoming album, Brown is Beautiful.
Inspired by the undocumented participants in the No Papers No Fear Ride for Justice, Hip-Hop artist, Olmeca, offers a sneak peak of the track "Browning of America" from his upcoming album, Brown is Beautiful.
Browning of America - Olmeca - No Papers, No Fear - Ride for Justice Blog
CALL FOR PAPERS. November 1-3, 2012 - Tucson Freedom Coalition Conference A Revolutionary Praxis of Hope
SAVE ETHNIC STUDIES
Tucson Freedom Coalition Conference
A Revolutionary Praxis of Hope
November 1-3, 2012 - Tucson, AZ
The Tucson Freedom Coalition (TFC) is an outgrowth of the struggle for Ethnic Studies in Tucson, Arizona. We see this struggle as having national implications, with Arizona as the epicenter of the current fight for Xicana/o rights. Tucson Freedom Coalition is already a national movement of Xicana/o activists, artists, organizers and educators who are collectively committed to building a political and cultural movement of resistance to reaffirm and restore the humanity of the Xicana/o community. As Franz Fanon writes, “A nation which is born of the people’s concerted action and which embodies the real aspirations of the people while changing the state cannot exist save in the expression of exceptionally rich forms of culture.”
Working toward a solid plan of personal, community and national liberation is the theme for this conference; a revolutionary praxis of hope working toward the reconstruction of the Xicana/o movement. The call to national resistance is one familiar to the Xicana/o community since 1848. That resistance has evolved over the years but there has always been a recurring theme of national resistance, until now. Four decades have passed since the height of what we call the Xicana/o movement, and there remain no national organizations carrying on the Xicana/o agenda, if it can be argued there is such a thing. This a sobering thought indeed because in order to be a national group three things are necessary: national leadership, national policy (or more exactly a way to implement it quickly) and national activity. National activity builds and develops a shared experience and collective conscience along with identity. We presently lack these three basic building blocks. The fact that most “Xicana/o politics” remain primarily within the student realm is also disheartening since the original intent of the Santa Barbara plan was to have the campus serve as a nucleus of the community. However, if it both starts and dies there, we the intellectual heirs of a street born mass movement, rising from the disenfranchisement and poverty of an entire group of people, have fallen into the trap of being nothing more than a social club climbing the ladder of bourgeoisie success.
Simultaneously, grassroots activists for marginalized communities, as well as advocates for social justice and human rights have also faced demoralizing and dehumanizing political attacks. Arizona has been the incubator for national policies and laws that are built around exploitation, alienation, and dispossession. Thus, it is fitting that Tucson, Arizona be the epicenter of a commitment toward liberation and empowerment for allies of the Xicana/o struggle and all who are dedicated to like struggles in their communities around the nation. It is time for solidarity and collective action!
Save Ethnic Studies and the Tucson Freedom Coalition invites activists, organizers, educators and artists to join us on November 1-3, 2012 in Tucson, AZ as we begin to address these crucial questions:
How do we create national structures that will speak to policy and organization that can enforce that policy? As the Xicana/o population increases, we find ourselves more disenfranchised from the power structure. How do we build autonomous structures of our own outside of the large corporate funders and the government? Now more than ever our community is ready to collectively take the reins and work for liberation. Where are the organizing trainers and others to assume some type of responsibility?
We propose the following outcomes for the conference:
1. The creation of a national organization to generate and enforce political policy for Xicana/os
2. The creation of a Xicana/o think tank to create policy and research specifically for Xicana/os
3. A national training institute for organizers
Call for ProposalsProposals will need to address one of the following areas:
1. How do we create national structures that will speak to policy and organization that can enforce that policy? As the Xicana/o population increases, we find ourselves more disenfranchised from the power structure. How do we build autonomous structures of our own outside of the large corporate funders and the government?
2. Now more than ever our community and our allies are ready to collectively take the reins and work for liberation. Where are the organizing trainers and others to assume some type of governing responsibility? What models of organizing and resistance are you using in your communities?
Presentation Formats
Panels or Papers:
These presentations are an opportunity to describe and share current work, theoretical perspectives, or research. Panels may be organized ahead of time by the group submitting the proposal as well as conference organizers grouping similar papers onto one panel. Presentations in this section will be 1 hour in length and should allow time for discussion.
Workshops:
Interactive workshop will share specific strategies for organizing or teaching and are an opportunity for individuals or groups to engage conference participants in hands-on, practical applications for addressing the conference themes. Workshops will be 1 hour and 30 minutes long.
Performances:
A limited number of artistic or cultural performances will be selected for the conference. Performances should connect to the theme of the larger call and address the outcomes in a performative manner. Performances will vary in length.
Proposal Submissions:
Proposals should be submitted to info@saveethnicstudies.org as an MS Word file no more than 500 words in length. All proposals should must address the following areas:
1. Title, type of proposal (paper/panel, workshop or performance), lead presenter and organization, additional presenters and organizations.
2. Content in relation to the conference: How will this presentation address the conference theme and how will this presentation help to advance the goals of the conference?
3. Format: Describe the proposed presentation in terms of the sequences of activities to be shared as well as any resources participants will receive. We encourage interactive, experiential presentations that engage the audience and are participatory in nature.
Proposals are due by September 14, 2012. Notifications of acceptance will be sent out by September 30, 2012.
Conference Fee: Conference organizers are committed to offering access to anyone interested and hope that this will become an annual gathering of diverse individuals committed to a revolutionary praxis of hope. To cover the costs of facilitating the conference the following fee will be due with registration:
Individuals: $25
Individuals associated with an institution: $50
"As individuals or as peoples, by fighting for the restoration of our humanity we will be attempting the restoration of true generosity. And this fight, because of the purpose given it, will actually constitute an act of love." – Paulo Friere
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)