Wendy Carrillo
MEChA has been saying this for years. Well, officially since 1999.
Yeah I agree. I'm not Mexican or Mexican American but my husband is Mexican from
uh...historically, i'ts the political identity of mexican-americans. while some might think the movement should move beyond its history, others think its history is what gives it shape. i couldn't imagine puerto ricans identifying themselves as Chicano, no more than I can imagine a Mexican-American identifying herself as Boricua.
Chicano/a writers/artists like Ana Castillo, Cherie Moraga, Guillermo Gomez Peña, n many others have been saying this since the early 90's especially with the 500th anniversary of the gran encuentro n two years later the Zapatista movement. There are a lot of people who already know this whose roots go bk to countries other than Mex but still proudly claim Chicano. Chicano is a borderless identity. Nit of here nor there but anywhere we choose to be n celebrate our mix.
@cindylu sometimes MEChA can be its own worst enemy. Not progressive, stuck in 1960's. The equivlant of Jerermiah Wright
@carlos I assume you are well aware of the NewYorikan civil right movement rightt? Seems like our national identities have to much in common to squabble over who is who. Heritage and political identity are not mutually exclusive.
@GMeraz agreed! There is an sort of violence commited against those NOT of Mex-American heritage who strongly support... See More Xicano identity. Its a lack of respect towards a shared political/social identity. You would think that history would teach the inclusion of "otherness" within "the other".
@me: We have a long ways to go.
@ Carlos but Chicano studies has been doing that for a lot of people. One yr at a NACCS conference an Armenian presented on how she found her voice n place via chicana writers. Chicanos have been exploring this liminal existance for decades so we have a body of works that voice the needs of others who find themselves not recognized by their ... See Moreancestral lands nor a part of the United Statetian fabric.
We are beyond our history yet still a part of it. N yes there are salvis, chapines n maybe a boricua or more claiming Chicano. It is vast n open.
Turkish youth in
i don't know that it helps to claim that 'everybody' can be chicano. you can attempt to redefine chicanismo to be inclusive of everybody but by that same reasoning anybody can claim a black political identity. there needs to be broader, more inclusive identity that covers the range of brown experience in the
Hmmm, the thing is Brown is only one shade. What about the Jewish blonde cubana who reads castillo and claims xicana? With an x? What then?
** loving the dialogue!
there's a real difference between empathizing with the struggle of other marginalized peoples (those living in borderlands, if you will) and claiming membership of that group. I can say, 'I am every woman' and empathize with the plight of gender discrimination, but that doesn't make me a woman! If by saying, we can all be chicanos you really mean... See More, we can all empathize with the plight of chicanos, that might be right.
Chicanismo limitations are grounded in its history. Arguably, the movement ran its course because it grew from nationalistic fervor. Today, more and more BROWN PEOPLE are less tied to their countries of origin and are more bound by experience. That experience isn't definitively chicano...it's something else....a BROWN IDENTITY.
Why reinvent the wheel? Chicano is maleable. They got a kind Chicano studies at UNAM since the mid 90s. Border theory has also opened ip the discourse to see how we can exist in the middle.
We need to remember we got generations of gente here that need to re-member, re-claim their rights as distinct people connected to this land. It's not about color. It's consciousness. Its struge for justice. It's having values that sometimes agree but often disagree with mainstream values.
We r saying the same thing but I think u are the one tied to old models. If we don't change or add to it who will?
History is all myths at the end of the day. Make new myths, bring ignored myths to the foreground. We got work to do. This thinking thing is fun though
the danger of claiming chicanismo as maleable is that it loses its distinctive identity over time. if what it means to be chicano today is different from what it meant 20 years ago, then it what way is it the same thing?!
I understand it to be essentially a mexican-american movement, in the same way that black nationalism is essentially an african-american movement...even if Jews, Asians and others get down.
Idk who u r rolling with but where i roll all peeps who claim n fight as Chicanos are included. Find new peeps.
Chicanos faced the same thing when fighting alongside of AIM at
i don't know that i'm identifying with old models as much as I'm considering historical contexts. i think chicanismo ran its course and that any attempts to revive it under a broader rubric runs into the problem of continuity over time.
The word Chicano was a term blending
In summary =), chicanismo is dead and any attempts to revive it under a broader 'non-national' umbrella ignores the role of history in shaping its identity. Even more, a new 'brown identity' is emerging, based not on nationalism but on a shared experience of being the 'brown' other in the
We know very well history can be revisited n in some cases needs to be turned upside down. Historical contexts are static n dead. We are talking about a continous struggle by the same people against the same forces that is alive today n growing n changing. It's how u decide to see life. Is it something that happens n happened or is happening n we have a role in it today for the sake of tomorrow.
Carlos is the Naz of Chicanismo ;)
Chicanismo is dead, but it shouldn't be. It began with a purpose and an all-out sacrifice for rights, politically and civically. No one really cares about that anymore and everyone is out for themself. Chicanismo has become just like the old countries, from where immigrants flee.
to be succinct: chicanismo is not dead. the term has evolved and taken new shape, just as many other terms and labels evolve. those who take on the term these days are not stuck in the 60s. (and neither is MEChA.)
@ cindy
your comment gets at the thrust of my point: if chicanismo, 'evolved into a new shape' how is it the same? to say it has evolved is to concede that it is different.
I hope MEChA has changed since my days at ELAC, when MEChA was all about exclusion if you didn... See More’t wear a Che shirt or joined some sort of Aztec dance group. Not to mention called you a sell-out if you had highlights in your hair, had a job, or aspirations to buy a home (chale! I aint buying a house, land doesn’t belong to no one ey!) (rolling eyes). I have heard that other MEChA groups were far more progressive and realistic with the times, but for ELAC to be that way, was I think in my humble opinion, just as oppressive as “the white man” which they often blamed for everything. That’s what I meant about being stuck in the 1960’s like Jeremiah Wright.
one MEChA chapter /= all MEChA chapters. it's quite the limited view to extrapolate your experience with a few MEChistas at ELAC to all MEChA chapters. i think the only ones who truly felt excluded by MEChA at UCLA were lazy people who didn't want to do any work with the various community service/high school outreach programs.
Ive heard UCLA is WAY more progressive. I went to a meeting...oooh... back in 2002? UCSB Mecha was also way better. Just saying, I was sadden by ELAC's limited view point on what MEChA should be, but there is some truth in that one chapter can ruin it for many. Especially young kids wanting to get involved and not being privi to going to a UC right... See More off high school. most kids do end up at community colleges. especially in this economy.
SO, what can be done to better improve community college chapters is really the next step for MEChA.
i don't see why being progressive means being more inclusive?
why couldn't/shouldn't groups have criteria for what counts as authentic membership? i thought that mecha/chicanismo groups got their strength by drawing such lines a la other ethic identity groups.
@ carlos so u are saying if something evolves it no longer is is valid as it was before?? I don't get your logic. The constitution has changed, it was amended. As individuals we grow and evolve. Groups and ideologies do too. I don't undrstand your pov and what I think u r saying is quite unrealistic n limited at best.
@ Wendy it's about their advisor. Having a good advisor will help any youth group develop into more realistic modes of operation.
my logic is very clear. i think the problem is your confusing and equivocating your terms. when a thing evolves it is no longer the thing it once was. humans evolved from apes. humans are not apes. when you use evolve you really mean adapt. humans adapt but retain their identity over time. a thing ceases to be the thing it is when it loses an ... See Moreessential part of its identity. (sorry, for the phil 101 but it's clearly needed)
My claim is that Chicanismo is 'essentially' nationalistic. I base this on the movement's concrete history. (As an aside, your claim that 'all history is myth needs to be fleshed out.' What you probably mean is that interpretations of historical facts are often debated...but that is different from saying, 'there are no historical facts, only myths.) When Chicanismo loses an essential component of its identity (namely, its nationalism) it has EVOLVED not adapted. When it has evolved it is no longer the thing it once was (remember the ape?).
And you don't really have fault with my logic (btw, which logical fallacy did I commit?), you have a problem with one of my premises: that 'chicanismo is essentially nationalistic.' My conclusion follows from my premises, so no problem with logic on my end.
Yes but it still serves it's purpose n new purposes.
yeah but your response doesn't address my argument.
1) Do you agree that when a thing loses something essential to its identity it is no longer that thing?
2) Has chicanismo historically been essentially construed in nationalistic terms?
3) If the 'new' chicanismo does not essentially construct itself in nationalistic terms, in what way 'other than by name' is it the same movement?
oh yeah, Hip Hop > Chicanismo
1) dont agree at all. We are still apes. Less hair. Watch wwf u will see what i mean
2) it had a nationalistic element that wasn't the whole basis. Aztlan as a nation is conceptual. It wasn't about
3) again u r looking at chicanismo as simply nationalistic it has ... See Morespirituality, art, food, lamguage it's a full culture. It's the things that bind us. It makes George lopez funny n keeps us nodding our heads when he describes us. The tortilla w butter. The weenie in a tortilla. It's jacketa n parkiar. It's calveras for sale at a gallery on day of the dead. Come on we are more than a nation we are a people
its pupusa restaurants on cesar chavez and soto!
1) a car was made for travel we made it into an art in lowriders. Can you still drive it? Is it still a car?
3) chicanismo was not a movement. There were movements by chicanos who believed in chicanismo. Some wanted better conditions in the fields, others in the schools, others wanted us out if vietnam, others a stop to police brutality, others ... See Morewanted land n to respect the treaty of Guadalupe hidalgo, others wanted access to the mainstream. They were all movement by Chicano. Chicanismo it self was not a movement.
Re: 1) funny but untrue.
Re: 2) I never said it was its 'whole basis,' only that it was an essential element to its identity. (btw, claiming I said something I didn't IS a logical fallacy).
Re: 3) ditto 2
Re: 1b) the question is, when is a 'car' no longer a 'car?' When it loses an essential element of its identity...whatever it might be. In the case of chicanismo my claim is that nationalism is essential. With a car maybe its something like..3 or more wheels, combustible engine, navigable, etc. Whatever the case is with the car it had no relevance with my point.
Re: 3b) i thought we were using 'chicanismo' to cover the RANGE of civil rights actions taken by self-identified chicanos starting in the late 60's. we can use whatever term you like as long as it means something like the 'range of civil rights actions taken by self identified chicanos.' I don't see how this point helps your argument. ... See More
I hate to say it, Gerry, but your view has serious logical problems.
Don't wanna get caught up but I thought I'd share really quickly....Its a lot of things according to who's speaking. No one's an authority and can say who is or is not Chican@. In my opinion, it can even be a white girl who grew up in East los or Southside Phoenix all her life and therefore has all the customs/traditions and class/gender ... See Moreexperiences who eats tortillas w/ peanut butter (not just butter G) on her way to the marcha or to community college trying to better her life and get an education so she can NOT move up and out,but GIVE BACK to her community and family. What I hope it is not is those border patrol workers you mentioned..unless of course they joined to let us all pass through so we could have the hook ups... and they never catch anyone. BTW, that was a specific era of ELAC MEChA... not a good example of MEChA....plus there are phases or stages of chicanism@ and the angry/hateful one is usually the beginning...hopefully people change/transform. Its always evolving.
My point is that not all Chicanos wrk with nationlistic ideas.
We r apes.
At least I am
again, i never claimed that 'all chicanos' work with nationalistic ideas. I claimed, 'chicano' (and related terms) have their grounding (i.e., history) in a (real or imagined) nationalistic identity. I'm assuming everybody agrees. Gerry is suggesting that 'chicanismo' has moved beyond this to be more inclusive so that whites, jews, etc. can stake... See More claim to the movement. I see that.
But my point is that once 'chicanismo' moves from nationalistic identity (grounded in Aztlan, the Southwest or
Wendy wanted me to get in the mix and give my two cents. I feel very conflicted about this. Chicanismo means cultural pride, assertion of identity as Chicano....I have all kinds of issues with how it played out in terms of gender, but there were positive things, like collective empowerment that were asserted as well. There were non-Mexicans who ... See Moreclaimed Chicana/o identity back then (Chilenos, Salvadorenos, ) and there are now. It's not my job to police identities, but embrace those who seek a space for personal and political action/empowerment within it. Chicana/o as a term has a specific referent (Mexican descent living in/growing up in US) and a specific political identity (those who ally with/identify with the political project of the Chicana/o movemement, e.g. comunidad, civil rights). My hope is that some of the positive ideals emerging from the movimiento are carried forward while narrow nationalisms that are sexist, homophobic, racist, are left behind.
So in short, I agree with Wendy. And if you read old movement newspapers of the late 1970s you begin to see how Chicana/o moves in the direction of Third world solidarities and becomes less solely cultural (although this is still very important, and yes, it is Mexican culture). It's also important to note that Chicana/o also comes about in response to a historical displacement and is always a hybrid identity.
I'm making three types of arguments: 1) historical 2) philosophical and 3) practical.
My historical claim is that Chicanismo has its roots in nationalistic identity (e.g., Mexican, Mexican-American, etc.) even if at its edges there were non-Mexican-American's involved. The fact that there were Jews involved in starting the NAACP doesn't make the ... See MoreNAACP a non-black organization. The fact that there were chicano supporters of the black panthers doesn't make the black panther movement non-essentially black. 2) My philosophical point is that once a thing loses that which is essential to its identity it is no longer that thing. 3) Practically, then, I see little value in forcing new meaning into old terms that the younger generations view as old hat. Jesus was onto this problem thousands of years ago when he asked why someone would put 'new wine' into 'old wineskins?'
by the way, i want a wineskin for christmas.
Carlos, I understand your points, but don't agree.
Others here have also voiced that Chicanismo has evolved out of nationalism and it is still Chicanismo.
Your point about no longer being the same thing as it was in the past (yes thank god it isn't the same thing) of course it is not the same, but it still works in some of the same ways, but also in new ways for new times.
... See More
It seems you are looking at this very linear where we have to progress into something new and discard the old, come up with new terms etc.
This is more like a snake that sheds its old skin and gains new skin for now. Its more circular thinking.
Again nationalism was just ONE of many elements of
Chicanismo and it has been tempered down in recent years, but it is still Chicanismo. It has matured and accepted that it must evolve.
Cool. But I'm not sure you understand my points because none of your responses address them clearly. I think my historical, philosophical and practical points still hold. You seem to agree with 1 (chicanismo historically grounded in nationalism, even if blurred at edges). I don't think you follow my second, philosophical, point about the ... See Moreessential properties of things. Re: 3, at times you seem to agree with that new terms are needed, and at other times you want to pour new meaning into old terms. Your circular vs linear dichotomy, on my view, is empty ballyhoo. In fact, circular reasoning is an logical fallacy. Example, 'I believe the Bible is the Word of God because the Bible say's its the word of God."
That's circular and fallacious thinking. I don't want to think circularly.
Looks like what we have here is a difference of opinion based on schools of academic thought. Hmmm.
My philosophical training would have me say, “there is no chair, there is no Chicanismo”
Yet my realist training would have me say, “the chair was made by an undocumented worker, and Chicanismo has evolved”
wendy, i'd get a refund on that philosophical training =)
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment