Chicano/a history on the New World is older than European occupation of it, in fact, as recently as the last decade Chicanos have increasingly seen their roots in Aztec or other meso-american pre-hispanic cultures. The acceptance of the term Chicano/a by the group as a whole, gained popularity in the 1960?s and 70?s, but lost momentum in the next twenty years as the government incorporated the term ?Hispanic? over this self-identifying term. The purpose of this paper is to examine and analyze the acceptance of the term Chicana/o today.
Chicanos exist, in large part, because of some shared historical experiences, which they are increasingly examining in their political, social and economic aspirations. In particular, they share a long historical development with their large numbers and geographic distribution, thereby maintaining a highly diverse and cultural people. Chicanos have a number of shared characteristics, but a common factor largely shared in their cultural identity, is the fact that they have come, more or less recently, from what is now Mexico. One source of the heterogeneity of the group is the fact that they came at different times, under different circumstances, and moved into different areas and ways of life in the United States of America.
As a people, Chicanos are the result of two people, Raza and Anglo-Americans, coming together in the southwestern United States, and the mid-west as well. The formation of Chicanos as an ethnic group involves the establishment of Chicanos in the southwest, beginning with the period of Spanish exploration and colonization, to the period of adjusting to Anglo domination in the last half of the nineteenth century.
The roots of many Chicanos can be traced to the period of immigration, particularly the first three decades of the twentieth century. A period that led to labor and community organization, it can be characterized by the years immediately following the Second World War up to the early 1960?s. The 1960?s entail a period that seeds the Chicano movimiento, which at that moment was just starting to emerge.
El movimiento grew with the rise of ethnic assertion and insurgence, it signifies the point of acceptance of the term Chicano/a. The movimiento in many respects, paralleled the massive Civil Rights movements which strengthened the acceptance of ethnic identity and cultural lifestyles, which had remained long oppressed in the United States of America. Pride for distinct cultures became a reality, it was produced and managed by members of society as a result of interacting with each other, thereby became established and continual in American society, Chicanos for one, refused to settle for the melting pot syndrome.
Defining the term Chicano/a is difficult, its origin begins with the Chicano finding his lands gone, his religion seriously challenged, and himself a citizen of a country whose language , laws, and social customs he did not understand, in short, he became a victim of cultural genocide. ( 2, 8 )
Before 1930, the United States Census Bureau had difficulty defining the population of Spanish speakers, they used a category of foreign birth, or an individual who had either one of his parents born in Mexico, which made up the group which today we call Chicano. As a result of this, the census failed to identify people of Mexican descent who were in the southwest before the arrival of Anglos. ( 3, 18 ) People who had become legal U.S. citizens as a result of the signing of the Treaty Guadalupe-Hidalgo in 1848, a treaty that stole Mexico?s former northwest territories.
The 1940 census counted people as ?Spanish-speaking?, this applied to those for whom Spanish was the native language and had grown up speaking Spanish at home. This was not a successful process. By the 1940s, a generation arose which may be identified as Chicano/a, of which many may have reported English as a first language. A Spanish surname became the criterion for the census of the 1950?s and 1960?s, excluding those who may have married an Anglo and who consider themselves Chicano but were not counted because they did not have a Spanish surname. This also goes for those who had married Chicanos, of non-Chicano origin, being counted part of the Chicano population. It also would have included immigrants who came from Spanish-speaking countries other than Mexico. ( 3, 19 )
The 1970?s brought a more specific census, collecting information on Spanish surname, foreign parentage or birth, and whether the first language spoken was Spanish or not. A category was opened in which people could report whether they spoke the Spanish mother tongue and/or were Spanish surnamed in the states that make up the southwest, it would supposedly define Spanish Heritage. Those who reported their origin as Mexican, Puerto Rican, Central or South American, or ?Other Spanish?, were defined as part of the Spanish Origin category. Finally in 1972 and 1973 the category ?Mexican? was replaced with the category ??Mexicano or Chicano?, as this is part of the period of the Chicano/a movimiento. ( 3, 20 ) This census depended on self-identification as well, as not all Chicanos may have fit into or accepted the definition of Chicano/a at the time, but basically, the term was primarily limited to Chicanos for many years. It is at this juncture that many have argued over the usage and origin of the word Chicano. Some argue that its origin is ancient, deriving from the Nahuatl word for ?Mexican? or ?Azteca?, while a less evaluated interpretation, is that it is a distorted or Americanized version of ?’Mexicano’?. Many view the word Chicano, like a pocho, which is a tainted or contaminated ‘Mexicano’, linguistically and geographically removed from the Mother country, Mexico. While others feel it has a paradoxical meaning like ?nigger? or ?queer?, pejorative when used by outsiders and positive when used by insiders. ( 2, 10 ) But more significantly, it is a term that has been adopted by Chicanos themselves. It can long be argued whether a label depends on what is practiced or what is meant, but the most important criterion in terms of selecting a label, is whether the concepts as mentioned above, are acceptable by the signified in language. ( An example of this is to think of a tree, is the tree that you?re thinking about the same tree I?m thinking about? )
Dealing with Mexican descent, some prefer to label themselves as Mexican-American, while for others Mexican or Mejicano is suffice. The more marketable terms of today are Hispano, Latino, and Latin-American. Some even prefer the term Hispanic, a conservatively blanketing term of the mid-1980?s to mid-1990?s, with origins to the old umbrella term, Spanish-American. The calling of the word Chicano is a relatively new and recent experience.
Though in context, ?Mexican-American? for many Chicanos connotes middle-class respectability which is palatable to Anglos, it generally lumps such persons with other hyphenated American groups, ie., Irish-American, German-American Italian-American,?, into reinforcing the melting-pot concept. The terms ?Hispanic? and ?Latino? are euphemistic and fail to differentiate Chicanos from other Spanish-speaking people. ( 2, 11 ) Chicanos feel that the use of ?Hispanic? or ?Spanish? ties one to European and Caucasian roots,it confuses the Chicano, whose lineage is predominantly Indigenous. In other words, these terms provide a way for Mexicans living in the United States to assimilate, to become ?non-colonized? and non-Chicano.
The term Chicano is historically and politically leaden, while the two terms, Mexican-American and Hispanic, undo the long history of Chicanos, in my view. The quick use of these two labels, deny an important aspect of one?s heritage. It is natural for Anglos to come up with these labels, many reject the idea that Chicanos are a colonized people because formally they have the same rights as other citizens, and the notion that there are enough success stories of Chicanos circulating to provide a myth of equality, though culturally, the values and language of Chicanos have no formal or legitimate standing within American society. (2,10)
Chicanos today are not formally colonized. They constitute an internal colony within the territorial boundaries of the United States. The internal colony is a de facto one, with formal and legal equality but informally excludes from the legal political system. ?Internal colonialism means that Chicanos as a cultural / racial group exist in an exploited condition.? ( 2, 9 )
The American-born Chicano finds himself in a particularly ambivalent situation in that the Mexican-born National never lets him forget that he is not ?really? Mexican, and the Anglo never lets him forget that he is not really from here. A neither-here-nor-there syndrome emerges, but it is this hostility of and towards the image of Chicanos by Anglos and Mexicans which reinforces cohesion within the Chicano group. These images provide a rationale for continued social separation, and at the same time, it provides social ties and change into Chicano culture at a minimum.
Language is also a cohesive factor among Chicanos with respects to their isolation from Anglos. When my parents were growing up in Texas, they were forbidden to speak Spanish in school, including recess periods, in order that they ?learn English more rapidly?. Anglos designated ?Mexicans? as ?Spanish-speaking?, further developing a concept of self in Chicanos, positive or negative. This in turn, leads to the concepts of race, ethnicity and community being closely related. ( 1, 84 ) Strong pressure is applied to an individual if it appears that this individual who is a member of the community ( i.e. race, ethnicity ) is attempting to disassociate himself from it. We see this in the idea of ?La Raza?, the ?racial? and ?cultural? aspects which are inextricably intertwined. La Raza may be used as a neutral term, a positive term expressing pride in one?s national background, or used pejoratively to imply those aspects of the Mexican stereotype which are evaluated negatively: lazy, and therefore, poor, people with a mañana complex, who can never keep appointments on time. ( 1, 84 ) Many times it is used as a shorthand term for ?la gente de la Raza?, the people of the race. In English, La Raza would refer to ?our people?, not ?the race?. It loses the effort of conscious identification which this distinctive ethnic group enjoys in both a ?racial? and ?cultural? unity.
These labels arise from a kaleidoscope of diversity shared by La Raza. Chicanos are the second largest minority group in the nation, living in all parts of the United States and varying historical and cultural roots. ( 3, 21 ) It is in a sense marginal for Chicanos to live in an Anglo-dominated society, despite its diversity, Chicanos of Mexican descent, living in the United States, culturally neither Mexican nor American, yet influenced by both societies, form a colonized minority. ( 2, 14 )
The term Chicano is used to designate a person of Mexican descent who has been born in the United States, in order to distinguish from a citizen of Mexico, to whom … mejicano would be applied. (1,8) This statement is generally accepted as a rough definition of Chicano/a although with a diverse culture and people, the definition varies for many, further distinctions can be made, social reality being reflected. The person of Mexican descent is a participant in an ethnic culture, much of American culture being mediated to him. For example, a person living in Texas will call himself tejano, he considers himself a Chicano living in Texas. Years ago, Mexican Nationals were also referred to as mejicanos. They came to the United States legally through the Bracero Program to assist in harvesting seasonal crops. They were referred to as braceros, they in a sense are also the roots of many Chicanos in the United States today. Both of these groups tejanos and braceros, were said to be distinguishable by their clothes, hair styles, other behaviors, including walk, style of dancing, speech and attitudes…
( 1, 8 ) These characterizations of La Raza are still seen today. Texts state Mexicans who came to the United States were most typically peones and mestizos; with little formal education, possessing few special skills, and predominantly Catholic. ( 1, 25 )
Chicanos are powerless, lacking control over critical social institutions which have a direct impact on them. Barrio businesses are generally owned by outsiders, and the schools, political system, and other institutions are also controlled and administered outsiders. ( 2,9 )
The Mexican is a man ?subjugated to nature? helpless in a
universe which willfully and unpredictably follows rules of its
own. He is, further, a member of a society where men are not
equal, and where perfectibility, or development of any kind, is
not stressed. He simply is, and such significance as he enjoys
comes simply from being. ( 1, 32 )
In the United States, Americans tend to identify human beings with their work and success. The belief that all men are created equal can be found in the middle class exclusively.
Though the dominant society has sought to obliterate the Chicano culture and heritage, contemporary Chicanos recognize that their roots are in Mexico, not in the United States. ( 2, 14 ) An unstated goal of the movimiento was to restore pride and respect for the word Chicano, a movement for Chicanísmo and Carnalísmo ( sisterhood and brotherhood ). It parallels to why Black-Americans selected the word ?black?, to serve as a rallying point for its movement, and as a source of pride and dignity. ( 2, 11)
Generally, people whom I have asked formally whether they accepted the term ?Chicano/a? or not to identify themselves used the term, especially university students. Students felt the term is politically orientated. It is a word that signifies the political history of Mexican-Americans. One student felt the word pertained only to the ?political side? rather than the cultural aspect overall. It is stated that third and fourth-generation Chicanos tend to become more Americanized, although many, especially the college educated, are rediscovering their Mexican-Indigenous roots. ( 3, 10 )
I feel the term is gaining national popularity once again, though each definition is different generation to generation, more specifically for each individual who identifies with it. The uniqueness of the history behind the term makes it acceptable for those who use it with pride in this decade that has an undetermined name. Diverse characteristics and styles stress individualism, each year with a different mode can relate to the history of Chicanos, which is why I feel the term Chicano/a has become popular for this decade. The label of the 90?s decade has been discussed like the term Chicano/a, each generation of people will select a label they feel describes them best.
Bibliography
(1) Enriquez, Evangelina and Mirandé. La Chicana; The Mexican- American Woman. Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Press, 1979.
(2) Macklin, Barbara June. Structural Stability and Culture Change in a Mexican-American Community. New York, New York: Arno Press, 1976.
(3) Reich, Alice H. The Cultural Construction of Ethnicity; Chicanos in the University. New York, New York: AMS Press Inc., 1989.
(4) Rosaldo, Renato. Chicano: The evolution of a people. Minneapolis, Minnesota: Winston Press, 1973.
Popularity: 4% [?]