What Impact Does Immigration Have on the Psyche of Select Latin Groups Focusing on the Chicano Select Group
What Impact Does Immigration Have on the Psyche of Select
Latin Groups Focusing on the Chicano Select Group
ABSTRACT:
This research project focuses on how migration, as a tool to utilize advantageous class mobility and education for further and next generations, is a theoretical approach that has not reached an outright documentation of success, because the same empirical governance of borders that affects migrants, continues to have effects on their children and grandchildren and so on. Chicanos are a select Latin group that is the focus of this study, and the main issue researched was what impact the perception of immigration has on the psychological outlook of Chicanos. The research conducted was using three different ethnically Mexican people who are all educated on the subject of Chicanos, as well as using class research to draw ethical and logical points as to why Chicanos are so negatively affected. The major findings and conclusions of this study were that Chicanos face a just as severe, and in most cases, worse psychological impact due to the betrayal they feel by both American and Mexican counterparts, though the blame should be shifted to the empirical anglo-saxon state of America, as it has produced racism, xenophobia, and nativism within its policies to counteract the constructed ‘race’ of Latinos due to fear of immigration.
Introduction:
The focus of this study was to see the relationship between Chicanos and Latinx immigrants and how immigration affects the social, political, economic, and educational views of American-born Chicanos. The study included primary interviews of three studies, my mother, my maternal grandmother, and my professor from my previous institution. The respective interviews were used with a migrant who has become a permanent resident, an American citizen raised in Echo Park, and a migrant who gained American citizenship. A few other resources I used from outside of the course were Pedagogy of the Oppressed by Paulo Freire Hunger of Memory by Richard Rodriguez, and Subtractive Schooling by Angela Venezuela. I used these sources to conduct educational research on the effect of immigration on Chicanos which is influenced in heavy part by the societal perspective on immigration. Through my research, I found that Chicanos and societal views about immigration are correlated. In East Los Angeles, the relationship between the migrants and Chicanxs is found to be riddled with overindulgence of Chicanos who allow societal views to mitigate and harm their self-identity and self-confidence, resulting in lower annual incomes, younger pregnancies, and lower educational attainment. On the other hand, migrants have successfully adopted the ‘bootstraps’ motif and have been able to overcome such barriers, at least only concerning American-born, first and second-generation, Los Angeles-living Chicanos. My research will be conducted using interviews and secondary information. Throughout my studies, I have seen that Chicanos face identity crises due to the confusion that is brought by two different worlds. Ones at home and ones in school and societal settings. Though immigration policy affects only immigrants from their respective countries, the racism trickles down into other policies such as education. The root of oppression is finding the loopholes to continue oppressing the bloodlines of people who have been labeled by society as ‘others.’ Though never justifiable behavior, a person who is immigrating whether by legal or illegal routes, understands the perception they are going to face. They feel it from the moment they decide to want to come to the U.S. before they arrive. Thus, it is undeniable and seems to have less of a faze to them from preparation. For Chicanos as a group, they are raised by their parents to be ‘American’ and closer to Anglo culture by speaking English and having an education among other things. When confronted by society and school settings for the first time, such as in segregated schools, being put in lower level courses due to assumptions of poor English, and overall confusion by the population of whether to think of an Indigenous, Mestizo, or white Latino/a’s as American or Mexican causes a striking identity crisis. This crisis is usually met with anger, resistance, and acceptance that lead to distraction from education leading to higher dropouts, and thus leading to poor career abilities, which of course results in poverty and an endless cyclical battle.
Border and Rule: Global Migration, Capitalism and the Rise of Racist Nationalism
In Border and Rule, they discuss how migration and the perception of it is a symbolic attitude, that these walls are just as physical as they are mental. “As towering as they are, walls are not impenetrable.” The article states… within this rhetoric, the author is calling for an image of a physical wall. The wall is a literal figure of the walls that have been and will continue to be built through the Mexico-America southern border. Yet, the article is correct. These walls, towering, intimidating, brute, and rough, all are not walls that can not be crossed. The physical battle is only the first part. “Every day they jump, subverted, crossed. And despite our emphasis on the spectacle of walls, there are multiple dimensions to border governance.” The highlight and the point. As stated, this issue that Chicanxs face is a direct effect of the continuance of these dimensions that relay from the continued mental governance that carries down through generations, despite how long ago one’s family had migrated. This concept comes back to the idea, that was previously mentioned about nationalism, amongst Mexicans and other countries. The effect of negative perceptions of migration in America has allowed for the rise of nationalism to occur, and reshape itself into many different adversities. The act of physically crossing the border does not stop when a person has crossed and successfully landed in this country. The discrimination carries on and affects all people of a similar national origin. They will continue to be referred to as anchor, babies, or any other sort of derogatory term. This is a mental battle, a mental battle that Chicanos continued to face. In all this quote serves as a poetic justice for the fact that these walls do not stop. The adversity that people of Latino origin face in this country is consistently overlooked. The overlooking leads to an obliviousness for Chicanos, who are raised to believe that their purpose is to be 100% American and accepted into society. But this does not stop because the walls of political hot topics, such as racist rhetoric against migrants will always be put on the hot seat. To the dominating race, the Anglo-Saxons, all Latinos serve as a monolithic example of migrants. In recent years, the uptick of nativism and nationalism has been concerning. Chicanos, since the 90s have seemed to fall short behind migrants when it comes to subjects, such as education rates, income rates, perseverance, and an overall attitude about how the perception of the public on Latinos affects each group of Latin people. “Migrant worker programs constitute a distinct mode of racialization, both the result of and reproducing racism. Class relations cannot be reduced to relations of production, and, as Brenna Bhandar notes, “[r]ace and racism, gender, and sexuality shape the nature and form that class relations take and, significantly, how they are experienced.”... Migrant workers are racially constructed…” and so as not, every Latin worker is a migrant or a Chicano or Latin X, or Tejano, how does the overall population know how to differentiate this? So as not every Latin worker is a migrant or a Chicano Latinx, or Tejano, how does the overall population know how to differentiate this? The answer is simple they don’t. The truth is in the research people view, pregnant migrants as opportunity takers, subject Latinos to bordering governance, even outside of their origin country, and overall commit racist ideology onto a race of people. The construct of this race is also constructed, as Latinos do not race. The fact that race is a construct shows that it is utilized for people to commit racism and xenophobia on whom they see fit and to pick on the vulnerability of people who may be fearing the three D’s. Chicanx people were the focus of this research because it seems to be true that they are the ones who suffer the most from this ideology.
Chicano Vs. Mexican-American Vs. Latinx
To brief the results of information discussed and found, the identification of Chicanos must be thoroughly understood for context. For most, they may confuse or interchange the identity of Chicano or Chicanx with Mexican-American or Latinx. In the article “Who Identifies as Latinx?” they dive into the question and what it means to people. ‘“Latinx”—a gender-neutral variation of “Latino/a”— is increasingly used to describe the Latin American diaspora. Despite expanded use of the term, the 2019 National Survey of Latinos found that just 3% of Hispanic- Latinos have ever used “Latinx” to describe themselves. Drawing on these data, we address three interrelated questions: 1) what factors explain Hispanic-Latinos having heard of the term? 2) What factors are associated with using the term to identify oneself? 3) What explains why individuals believe the term should be used to describe the Hispanic-Latino population?” (Who Identifies as Latinx) The questions and lack of historical context itself are enough to differentiate the term from Chicano. Mexican-Americans, for all intents and purposes of this research, will be to identify any group of American-born Mexican descent people. The history of Chicanos affected by immigration has preceded this country for decades. There are cases, especially in education, that have proven the identity of this sector of Mexican Americans is highly impacted by the outlook America has had on Latino immigration as a whole. Paulo Freire looks at the impact of education, an important standard that all Americans at least have a form of access to, and paraphrases states that “Leaders who do not act dialogically but insist on imposing their decisions, do not organize the people--they manipulate them. They do not liberate, nor are they liberated: they oppress. . . Looking at the past must only be a means of understanding more clearly what and who they are so that they can more wisely build the future.” Chicanos have arguably been linked to a more intense degree of stereotyping, such as zoot suit criminality behavior, young impregnation, poor language skills in either Spanish or English, and irrefutable discrimination in schools due to appearing as an immigrant. The Chicano culture is a mix of remnants of attitude towards immigration as well as attitude towards Mexicans who were deemed as anchor babies, children of illegals, and a criminal cultural idea. The origin of Chicanos must always include the fact that the culture is a triad of cultures deriving from the Spanish, the indigenous peoples of North and Central America, and the Anglo-Saxon culture that integrated into the area of what is now known as Los Angeles. The Spanish gave what is now known as Chicanos their language and religion. Most of them have been raised or have a significant in-depth understanding of what the catholic religion is and most notably will name one figure of the denomination. The indigenous gave them features such as high cheekbones, dark straw hair, and brown skin in shades of light to dark, some Aztec descendants were slender and tall, and some Mayan descendants were shorter and round with strong shoulders, thick words such as atole and tamale. The English also gave Chicanos their language, a unique sense of music taste that has a heavy appreciation for the post, new, and modern wave music that sprung out of England in the nineteen-eighties, as well as arguably the fashion sense. All three of these cultures manifested into the Chicanos of Los Angeles, as the three cultures were all introduced to the newly born identification of Chicano/a, the new generations of newly born American citizens of Mexican descent were exposed to all three in the culmination of gentrification, older generations, and the outward diversity found within Los Angeles. Thus, to find or try to identify as a new kind of Mexican, shedding a migrant idea of who they would appear to be, but not being able to fully adopt the Anglo-Saxon way of life due to multiple factors. Thus, the identity of being Chicano was born.
In conducting my research, I used the method of primary data collection using an interview format with my mom, my maternal grandmother, and my previous professor of Chicano studies at my old institution. The questionnaire included only the following: How do you feel about your status regarding immigration? Would they change their status if able to? Do they feel opposed or threatened by the opposite status? Are there any experiences that exemplify a difference or how you feel about Chicanos being affected by societal perspectives on immigration? My first interview was with my mom.
Perez, William & Cortes, Richard and A Chicana’s Perspective on What it is to be Chicana
“In fact, among immigrant Latino families, acculturation, parental educational attainment, and socioeconomic status are correlated with depression (Araujo & Borrell, 2006; Berry, 1990; Finch & Vega, 2003; Portes & Rumbaut, 2006; Rivera, 2007). Gee et al. (2006) find that immigrants develop more psychological symptoms with increased time in the U.S. as a result of their daily experiences of racial discrimination and unfair treatment. Higher rates of suicide and substance abuse have been found among immigrants with greater lengths of residence in the U.S.” (Perez, William & Cortes, Richard) Olivia Acuna is a Generation X Chicana, who was born and raised between Echo Park and East Los Angeles. Much of the English and Spanish culture is present in her. She is fluent in both languages, with no defining accent of either. They both speak true and well. Her music taste is heavily influenced by the English music and culture already written about in the essay. Much of the influence she has found has come from Anglo-Saxon media or personnel. She is a generation American citizen born to a visa-approved single Mexican woman who had migrated to Los Angeles at eight months pregnant to have her. I tried to conduct my research as unbiased as possible, concluding answers only from what I had been told and nothing else. In the sequence I stated previously, I will confer and write her answers. In regards to how she feels in regards to immigration, there is a large level of disconnect. Most issues she focuses on in the current media or news about news in European or Middle Eastern countries and conflict. Because we do not see many issues with immigration from these countries, at least not for a few years now, it is not something that has come up in her mind. When asked a follow-up question about how it made her feel or what was impactful about her other having migrated only a month before giving birth to her, she said that she felt grateful and encouraged to know she had a mother who was so strong, but that she did not know or understand the circumstances under which her mother migrated here, and concluding that she must have come legally and easily. She highlighted that she knew she was fortunate not to have to worry about concerns such as status, even though she had felt heavily discriminated against and subjected to racism throughout her life, predominantly when she lived in California, though she never recalls an incident that had to do with accusatory claims or questions concerning ehr status as if she was an immigrant, possibly due to the high level of migrants that live in areas such as echo park and east los angeles and it was a given, or possibly because the city was a sanctuary city, or even more simply possibly because racism against brown people is notoriously chalked up to being an illegal Mexican most times. When asked if she would change her status if possible, she said no, which did not surprise me at all. She said that if she were to do so it would be a regressive action and that it does not help or further the cause of why her mother decided to give birth to her in the United States. She believes that there is nothing for her in Mexico and that even though she adores the country, she does not feel any sort of calling or connection to live there or ever experience it as more than just a guest or visitor. When I prompted her with my third question, she said that growing up, she remembers being forced to learn English as well as take courses in elementary to improve both of her uses of each language. She felt outcast by kids who only spoke English as they would very obviously hear negative terms or thoughts about them but surprisingly heard it from Spanish speakers as well. The way the program had functioned was that in all of Los Angeles if a child was born to a Spanish-speaking parent and the child was an American citizen, they would be enrolled into the program. If a child had migrated with their parents to the United States and was not born here, they were not allowed to participate in the program and were only allowed English as a second language for any supplemental language help. Because of this, migrant children would tease my mother, obviously in a masterful way in which children play, but it seemingly struck a chord with these children who were not given or allowed the opportunity to develop their Spanish speaking skills, which would serve well when speaking with their parents or if they decided to return home to the latin american countries they had migrated from originally. My mom said that she felt the school and district implemented that rule because they saw it as employing migrant children with the skills they needed to return and better their countries, and only gave the course to non-migrant children so they could have more opportunities for labor in America without big corporations needing to outsource. When she told me this, it seemed like such an irrational thought that only became clearer the more I pondered it. What good is a U.S.-born Mexican or Central American who can speak English to large corporations? Without the use of migrant workers, these corporations cannot outsource jobs. Yet, Chicanos are among the highest unemployed groups of Latinos. For my mom, this is a privilege that has not been abused by her. She has had to be strategic about work and was born in time not to require education for work. Overall, the relationship between her and the experience of migrants from originating Latin countries is very far, and it shows a disconnect between the experiences migrants have, though Chicanos and their navigation of American living seem to be heavily influenced by migrants’ feelings.
Perez, William & Cortes, Richard and A Permanent Resident on the Chicanx ‘Issue’
“Undocumented immigrants may have distinct characteristics compared to either their documented immigrant or American counterparts. Is documentation status related to mental health, and if so, why and how? Is “undocumentedness” a higher-risk category in comparison to documented immigrants? Should documentation status be considered in the assessment of psychological and emotional well-being? Though few studies have examined the impact of legal status on immigrant families, findings suggest that it can shape migration and acculturation experiences and influence the risk of depression and anxiety. The limited research available suggests that undocumented adult Mexican immigrants are more likely to experience a traumatic event, have fewer economic and social resources, and are more marginalized and vulnerable to exploitation (Perez and Cortes, 2005).”
The second subject of how immigration, its stigma, and policies affect Chicano people was from my maternal grandmother, who is a Mexican citizen with a permanent resident status in the U.S. The latter quote relates to her observation and experience of how her migration affected her daughter, a Chicana. When I asked her if she would change her status, she said no, despite having the opportunity to since Ronald Reagan’s presidency in the nineteen-eighties. Going into her why, she stated that she never felt like it and that she never felt one hundred percent safe to do so. The political statuses of the country were so ever-shifting, facing discrimination for work done by her, predominantly by immigrants and migrants in general, the country never felt like a full home to her, but one perfect enough for her daughter. She managed to overcome and make the U.S. her home, despite never committing to the country with her status. When I asked her about how she thinks her immigration has affected her daughter and Chicanx members of her family, she truly believes that living and being born in the U.S. has sort of ‘spoiled’ them. What she meant was that she felt they had all wasted their advantages, such as better education, better work opportunities, and more ability for class mobility in this system. She essentially thinks that all Chicanxs in her family, as well as the collect them. She stated “I have never seen people so lazy as I have of the ‘chicanos’ (she pronounces the term with a hint of annoyance, because she does not think the term is real, and holds the same mindset as many native Mexicans do towards the word ‘Latinx’) and what they have done with themselves. What they have done is just that- nothing. They have so much opportunity at their disposal, and I do not see it being utilized at all. None of my sister’s kids went to college, barely any finished high school, and they all have no respect for work or what they do. It is shameful.” I told her that I believed the issue derived from the ‘half Mexican half American’ issue that many American-born Mexicans seem to deal with. Famously from Selena, based on the short-lived life of the iconic Tejano singer, they quote “We have to be more Mexican than the Mexicans and more American than the Americans, both at the same time! It's exhausting!” which has become seemingly one of the most famous quotes of the twenty plus-year-old film. It is a trope that I see, hear, and experience a lot. When I said this to my grandma, she vehemently agreed, saying “Yes, that is exactly what they think, but no one expects these behaviors or attitudes from them. I don't know where they got these ideas from. I never put that on your mom, my sisters never put it on their kids…all these younger kids, they don’t appreciate, they don’t respect what we did for them. We left home for them, to take advantage of these things, so your mom wouldn’t have to suffer like me. She ends up having it even harder than I did, and why? I never wanted her to do anything more than just graduate high school, get married, and have her kids. She screwed it all up. I gave her everything I could and she did nothing with it all.” The impact of how my mother was viewed in school when she was younger, especially being the daughter of a migrant who was not capable of helping her daughter assimilate into the culture that she had essentially forced her into. I believe, off of these first two accounts there seems to be a strong level of miscommunication between the two groups, and an even stronger misconception of Mexican-Americans and how they are viewed as synonymous to migrants in the ‘issues’ our country faces when it comes to any Mexican descent American. From the two testimonials, it is clear that there is a preceding issue, causing behaviors and attitudes of Chickens that lead to results that many Mexican-born people see as worse off than if they had never migrated. The issue is here and present, and face chicanas with a weird set of reality checks… They are instructed by their parents to learn English because that is all they are good for but feel demeaned for broken Spanish, they renounce their Mexican heritage to pass, but can not fully integrate into Anglo culture. The issue is being perpetrated, but who seems to be committing the perpetrating, is the biggest question.
Anchor Babies Over Breeders and the Population Bomb, Legal Passing, and The Latino Threat Narrative working as one
Throughout the semester in this course, I conducted some findings in the readings that relate to other subjects, but are interdisciplinary with the correct anecdotal background to add to the substance of each reading. When relating to how Chicanxs are viewed and the impact derived from the concurrent view of migrants, one of the first places to start is with their birth. Many people view Mexican or all Latinx-born children as anchor babies, usually assuming before confirming. This has been a large uptick in perception, especially in election years. In the article, Anchor Babies Over Breeders and the Population Bomb, the article states “However, not everyone greeted the news with enthusiasm. Many interpreted the increased birth rate as an indication of the country’s failed immigration laws and turned a hostile eye toward immigrant women. For example, when asked to comment about the increased fertility rate, John Vinson, president of the conservative American Immigration Control Foundation claimed: “The [U.S.-born] child is an automatic American citizen, thus entitled to all benefits of American citizens. This gives a certain financial incentive for people coming from other countries illegally to have children here.” (Anchor Babies Over Breeders and the Population Bomb) In regards to a large boom of children born in 2006. This brings into question; how would anyone who turned a grimacing mug to a new mother with an olive or darker complexion know if that baby was an anchor baby? Relating to the idea that what is occurring with migrants and immigration reforms, will eventually lead back to how Chicanos are facing. Because the race of Mexicans is not distinct, there are whites, mestizos, and indigenous people of the ethnic background. Because of this, Chicanxs are special in the way that they think they have full ability to legally ‘pass.’ “Legal passing may serve as a protection from detention, detention, and deportation. However, the cultural change associated with the practice is unlikely to contribute to the well-being of undocumented Mexican adults. It unfolds under the threat presented by restrictive receiving locales, one that entails a difficult daily grind and the constant risk of deportation and family separation. Under such conditions of fear and anxiety, the act of legal passing forcibly distances undocumented Mexicans from their ethnic identity. Within immigrants' legal passing work, culture is shed and subjugated, as ways of being, thinking, and moving through space are altered by the hyper presence of social control agents. Indeed, the assimilation associated with legal passing works against not only individual immigrants' wellbeing but also their inclusion in the broader social fabric.” (Garcia, Legal Passing)
The idea of passing is accepted and done by migrants here, to reduce the chance of the three D’s: detection, detention, and deportation. When these things do not apply to American-born chicanxs, what is the next line of defense? With the idea of American-borns already causing feelings of unhappiness, there is a feeling of wanting to expel or diminish the parties in which this overpopulation is occurring. That is the only malleable ideology that could come from this evidence. So, assuming this, what would the reaction be to Mexican presenting people (including Central and South Americans, as people believe Mexicans are a monolithic group to represent the rest and are probably viewed as more of a threat because these are people who cannot be abused or manipulated by threats of visas and acceptance of underpayment. Eventually, the negativity that faces migrants, must be leashed out onto the result of said migrants. If this was not the case, we would not see racism against Latinxs at all, and yet we see, hear, and for some, experience, the racism of being called derogatory names such as wetback, border hopper, beaner, and even spic. All of these are derived and fueled by racism, xenophobia, and hateful rhetoric concerning the act of migrating. Whether legally moved or not, whether American-born or not. But the key point to remember is that migrants are fully and willfully aware of their perception by Americans. This is in no way meant to diminish the psychological emotional or physical damage this infers onto Mexican migrants, but only to bring awareness to the idea that they know this. When they are aware, it can not harm them as severely as it may if they did not. Surely as children, the idea of this came as a shock, but it is something that Professor Hernandez argues is understood by Mexicans, ones who migrated and ones who did not. Chicanos are faced with a sort of betrayal that never stops betraying them. This is why the notion that is so prevalent within the community is what so many claim to be the root of their issues and experiences growing up. Not Mexican enough, not American enough, yet with the Mexicans, the migrants, there seems to be little to absolutely no backlash except for jokes about a lack of speaking Spanish. The real harm is being done by the American societal view and interpretation of migrants, which in turn leads to the persecution and misadjustment of the community. Since this essay contains the argument that the betrayal of Chicanxs will and does begin in schooling, the question must be prompted: what about schools filled with diverse Latinx students? With multiple streams of research to confirm, it is known that Mexicans and the nation, carry out nationalist, xenophobic, and anti-indigenous practices, thoughts, and rhetoric against Central and South Americans. This nationalism that they possess should naturally reach an ultimate amount of power and principle in the idea of Chicanx identity and what the qualifications for it are. But alas, nationalism in Mexico, a state that is financially and politically in a lower tier than the United States, can not perfect nationalism because the highest source of power rejects it. From Anchor Babies Over Breeders and the Population Bomb, the study states “The U.S. environmental conservation movement emerged during the twentieth century, and with it came new theories that perpetuated the undesirability of immigrants.
Early conservationists believed that new immigrants “threatened ‘native’ values and wildlife,” and coupled their campaigns for wildlife protection with anti-immigrant rhetoric. As the environmental conservation movement grew in popularity, nativists adopted environmental rhetoric to argue that population stabilization was needed because the country’s population was growing at a rate that threatened to upset the delicate balance of the natural environment. Reducing immigration, they reasoned, was the solution.” (Anchor Babies Over Breeders and the Population Bomb) Nativism is nothing new to the very foundation of America we know that was birthed from the search for individualism that has boomed and become the society we know now. The idea of pluralism contrasts ‘100% Americanism’ to multiculturalism. Nativism, culture, and immigration are the specter that haunts all of these concepts. These were conceived as solutions to immigration, not just immigration and xenophobia, but when people came with differing religions and cultures, in the early nineteen-tens it had become an issue. Americans were having trouble accepting Catholics and Jewish people. Mexicans, native to the country or born generationally in America, are most likely to be and remain Catholic, but this early introduction of xenophobia, refers more to Italians and Irish. The response to this was what became known as the ‘100% Americanism’ during the nineteen-tens and boomed as a response during World War I by anglo protestants. Their movement was solemnly named ‘WASPs’. Custom of WHITE ANGLO SAXON PROTESTANT. In the article entitled Latino Threat Narrative, “Huntington compared Latinos, especially Mexicans, with earlier waves of European immigrants and found that “unlike past immigrant groups, Mexicans and other Latinos have not assimilated into mainstream U.S. culture, forming instead their own political and linguistic enclaves—from Los Angeles to Miami—and rejecting the Anglo-Protestant values that built the American dream.” He also made these assertions: “Demographically, socially, and culturally, the Reconquista (re-conquest) of the South-west United States by Mexican immigrants is well underway”; “In this new era, the single most immediate and most serious challenge to America’s traditional identity comes from the immense and continuing immigration from Latin America, especially from Mexico, and the fertility rates of those immigrants compared to black and white American natives.”’ (Latino Threat Narrative) This quote shows how, within the history of nativism, it is still as relevant today as it was one hundred or so years ago. It goes to add that the view of Mexicans being far too fertile, far from protestant views, and so on is still considered ‘threatening’ in this society. It is viewed that way concerning jobs, numbers, and cultural overtaking. After the emergence of nativism the first go around, how did Catholics and Jewish people respond? They were openly contemptuous of recent immigrants, specifically Mexicans and central/south Americans. Thus, this 100% Americanism became less accepted, and the liberal shift of America came to accept ‘pluralism’ which was conceived by a Jewish activist. This was the notion that individual groups, no matter where from, were all important to the contribution of the United States. This became the program and movement of the government during World War two, which boasted that attitudes must shift to welcoming and tolerant. It is sponsored for the understanding that people, despite backgrounds, cultures, and religions, are people. What we know as the current social movement concerning migrants is ‘multiculturalism.’ it started in the mid-60s due to black power which was defiant and militant. It was a much more critical view of white society and dubious of black people ever being accepted. Due to this, the need to protect the cultural differences of African Americans is something these select Latinx groups seem to still struggle with. In the pluralism era immigration was poor, due to the Johnson-Reed Act. It attracted a severely limited number of immigrants. 1965 Hart Seller Act, coincided with changes occurring in the developing world which spurred people from Central and South America to come, which they did in droves. Because of the complexity of nativism in America versus the simple superiority complex in Mexico, it is very simple and reasonable to see why Chicanxs and the rhetoric they are fed at home, have a complete breakdown and succumb to the idea that they are less than in this way. Thus the impact of immigration and how it spews ideas of xenophobia and nationalism in America, even amongst other groups of colored people, is to break the Chicanx down. It is such as a child who believes that because he got a compliment from the teacher in class (equivalent to being born in America) he can hang out with the cool kids at lunch, but when lunchtime begins, they still do not allow him to sit (equivalent to Americans still rejecting any kind of Latinx.) Thus they are broken down… much more down than the migrant is, because they are aware of it long before.
A Migrant Turned Citizen Professor on the Chicanx Issue
I first encountered Professor Hernandez when studying for my Chicano and Aztec studies degrees at East Los Angeles College. He was born and raised in Mexico City, before migrating to the United States where he attended the University of California, Santa Cruz before applying for and being granted citizenship during Ronald Reagan’s presidency in the nineteen-eighties. His view is impacted by his doctoral degree specializing in Chicanx studies, as well as Aztec, Mexican, and Chicano literature. Not only this, he is married to an Anglo-Saxon woman, and all six of her sisters are married to men who are either Mexican migrants, Chicanos, or Mexican-Americans. Note that the difference between the Chicanos and Mexican Americans is that Chicanos, for this study, are ONLY first or second-generation Mexicans, born in southern California. Mexican-Americans can be referred to as anyone born outside of this jurisdiction, is any kind of generation, a legally born American, and as long as not born in Mexico or southern California. He feels that his studies and anecdotal evidence go hand in hand with the notion that immigration, the view of Mexicans in America, the attitude derived from this ‘in-betweenness’ Chicano identity, as well as the need to fit into American society, are all valid and proved reasons as to how the immigration problem has seemingly become the Chicano problem. I informed him about the project and asked him to provide any evidence he deemed necessary to prove my hypothesis of “what impact does immigration have on the psyche of select Latin groups focusing on the Chicano select group” and allowed him to speak to it.
“When I first came to the United States, I was bewildered by the fact that so many immigrants who worked in the grocery store I worked in were so well off. They had newer used cars, they wore nice clothes outside of work, they lived alone in okay apartments… I met a friend in a Mexican studies class. He self-identified as Chicano, and he was, as a first generation born and raised in East Los Angeles, the birthplace of Chicano culture. He was nothing like my grocery store friends. He always found a way to make a complaint about everything… Since the basis of our relationship was our shared Mexican culture, I suppose he felt open to telling me what he thought about his shortcomings. He never did homework, yet when he began to fail English, he blamed it on being Chicano because he couldn’t speak English well. When he began to fail Spanish, it quickly became the same excuse. When he failed economics, it was because he was too poor growing up, so he had no access to acquainted with the information to be successful in the course. He always had an excuse. But I still did not understand it… when I married my wife, two of her sisters got married a few years later right around the same time as one another. The older sister had married an immigrant who was allowed to become a citizen a few years later, and the other married a Chicano from Boyle Heights. The immigrant had been here for a few years, worked, and then bought agricultural land. Chicano had gone to California State University Long Beach, but he found median field work after college. It took him several years to finish his schooling and graduate and afterwards had no determination to utilize his degree in the maximum way possible. I did not understand, up until that point, being from Mexico, I thought to myself ‘Wow, American-born Mexicans must be the luckiest people. The first advantage to universities, is easier to navigate their finances… all this opportunity at their hands.’ But then I met this husband… And it clicked! The rhetoric that pervades within America, that immigrants are this and that, real immigrants know that this is how they are viewed when they come here. They can not be broken by it because, by the time they decide to emigrate, they know what is coming to them here. The journey itself is harder than the names Anglos call them. Chicanos on the other hand live in this world and are raised in it. Seemingly enough, the reality shock that they are presented with, perhaps in early childhood and school, has caused them to suffer a sort of social depression. They suffer between the two and some overcome, such as Richard Rodriguez as exemplified by his writing in Hunger of Memory. A quote I pulled from the book specifically to conclude your point… ‘To many people around him, he appears too academic. There may be some things about him that recall his beginnings—his shabby clothes; his persistent poverty; or his dark skin (in those cases when it symbolizes his parents’ disadvantaged condition)—but they only make clear how far he has moved from his past. He has used education to remake himself. They expect—they want—a student less changed by his schooling. If the scholarship boy, from a past so distant from the classroom, could remain in some basic way unchanged, he would be able to prove that anyone can become educated without basically changing from the person one was. The scholarship boy does not straddle, cannot reconcile, the two great opposing cultures of his life. His success is unromantic and plain. He sits in the classroom and offers those sitting beside him no calming reassurance about their own lives. He sits in the seminar room—a man with brown skin, the son of working-class Mexican immigrant parents.’ If Rodriguez, a man of elitist semantics, can not dissociate from the pain of his Chicano background, how can the average one? They are subjected to the same harm that migrants are, socially, and economically, all because of their constructed race. This is a man who defied all odds and even was able to denounce the systems of power that produced these odds. His book is a testimony to experiences that all Chicanos, except a few rare ones, seem to experience. Educationally, socially, and so forth. In my opinion, this problem is one that we as immigrants have not prepared these children for.” Ironically, my professor is the reason I continue to thrive in education, and ended up completing my Chicano studies degree while self-identifying as a Chicana.
Subtractive Schooling And Its Findings:
To add more to his reasoning would be redundant, as it is completely a thought that I had already retained and had, but alas I will continue. Having taken his course, living in East LA, and having a basic sociological understanding of how American-born Chicanos and migrated Mexicans communicate has always been interesting to me. I am going to follow this up with a significant use of the book Subtractive Schooling by Angela Valenzuela… I came across this book initially during a course at California State University of Long Beach entitled Latino Education in the U.S. which emphasized the experience of migrant Mexicans and American-born Mexicans (American-born because the research of the book is conducted in Texas, and though I would have named the students Tejano they identify as Chicano, therefore I will use the neutral term of mexican american to allow for mitigation of the separate terms.) The book looks at qualitative research conducted by Valenzuela over the years, watching the two classes of Mexican students and their interactions with one another. I will quote a block quote which will be analyzed afterwards. “[F]rom achievement through disaffection, psychic withdrawal, resistance, and failure, I turned to the large volume of literature on immigrant/non-immigrant achievement. I review the most relevant aspects of that literature below. To address the issues that my research with Seguín's students identified as most salient, however, it was working in the specific areas of subtractive assimilation, social capital, and caring that proved the most useful… Merging insights from all three perspectives explains the variation in schooling experiences between immigrants and U.S.-born youth by directing attention to how the formal and informal organization of schooling diverts Mexican students from essential resources. The operant model of schooling for acculturated U.S.-born youth structurally deprives them of social capital that they would otherwise enjoy were the school not so aggressively (subtractively) assimilationist. Stated differently, rather than students failing schools, schools fail students with a pedagogical logic that not only assures the ascendancy of a few but also jeopardizes their access to those among them who are either academically strong or who belong to academically supportive networks… "They'd just rather wish this problem of more and more immigrants away. It is much too inconvenient to really sit down and deal with," she observed, cynically.” (Valenzuela, Subtractive Schooling, 57) The social capital that drew the newly immigrated students and that drew the parents of the American-born Mexicans essentially fails the two categories. Yet, when examining the numbers of migrant students’ graduation rates versus American-born, the numbers are staggering and different. Mexican-born migrants as a community, have about sixty-nine percent of high school diplomas. American-born are at a distressing forty-four percent. Overall, of all U.S. living adults, only thirty-seven percent have obtained a diploma. While this study does rely heavily on the points of education, it is important to stress that it only makes the argument that much stronger. America is the foundation of education and was essentially revolutionary with the advantage that came from teaching and mandating students to have a formal education that was not centered around child labor (re: my example of my mother’s testimony and that without migrant children being prepped for the workforce, the U.S. would essentially fall apart.) and is essentially a beacon of hope for migrants. If the schools are trying to remove and diminish migrants, their culture, language, and heritage in nineteen ninety-nine, then why is the study from two years ago showing that the lasting effects of this attitude are still affecting American-born children? Again, referring back to the testimonials, school is the first place students and children who are otherwise oblivious begin to realize that their social capital and race are dependent on how Americans view where they came from. With this notion, American-born Mexicans are seemingly falling into this trickery of the idea that their citizenship is good enough for the Anglo society they are living. The reality is, that many are accused of being and sometimes are, with no shame to the statement, anchor babies. The move to America did not make their family much different, in the eyes of the American-born, and is most likely linked to the recent extreme rise of white supremacist Latinos. Though that is a completely different case study, it is important to note that these cases of ‘in-between’ feelings by Latinos, such as Richard Rodriguez’s Hunger of Memory spends a majority of the autobiographical piece demeaning and speaking down on Mexicans who did not assimilate, whether they were born here or not. The influx of anti-immigrant rhetoric that became a buzzing topic after Trump announced his running has exposed something about Chicanes that no one had been able to pin their finger on for a long time. That their Americanness is not nearly American enough to be passing, and though migrants learn the art of ‘passing’ chicanos can not because they were not meant to have to… because they lack these skills and acceptance of the derogatory nature that migrants have to experience before they even journey to the united states.
Overall Findings and Concluding Thoughts
Migration to America is usually a dream for people and has been one of the highlighted standards of this country’s institution since the dawn of its creation. In recent years, specifically after the terrorist attack on September 11, two thousand one, the use of migration by Mexicans and other Central and South Americans has turned into a sort of demonic journey. This has caused irreparable harm to the psyches and physical states of many migrants who were forced to migrate illegally or ‘the wrong way’ due to the lengthy and expensive process of migrating legally. This trend has caused an influx of the population to enlist upon nativist and nationalist ideation, irrefutably rooted in racism and xenophobic characteristics. It is known that migrants do not get the mental support they need, as it is one of the first sources used in this research project. Upon the three ethnically Mexican people interviewed for this research, it seems that the only one oblivious to the obvious unacceptance of the population is the Chicana. The lack of mental health help and the need to consistently hide for concern of the three D’s: detection, detention, and deportation. It is easy to connect the dots on how and why children, despite having full American citizenship, will also not have access to these resources. Their migrant family members may not know believe or accept this help, for reasons such as unwillingness to cooperate or fear of deportation because of untrustworthiness with law and authority figures. The chicane babies will always be viewed as anchor babies as well. Despite many third--, fourth, and fifth-generation Mexicans who try their very best to assimilate, the used sources have shown much research as to why their assimilation can never come. Though they may move to places such as Downey, California which is highly well known for its later-generation Mexican families, they are still secluded to their small populations and are undoubtedly still subject to racism or wrong judgment due to the assumption of their legal status. While migrants ‘pass’ to not be deported, chicanxs pass because they are raised to be American. It is most likely within a school that they will encounter their first moments of legal status assumption, such as a teacher asking them to not speak Spanish, Mexican children laughing at their terrible Spanish, or even a flat-out racist comment. Because of this, we know that the Chicnax response is essentially to do worse than migrants when it comes to statistical numbers on things we as a population deem as success, such as owning homes, employment rates, and education levels. American-born Mexicans are always lacking in these areas more than migrants who have certainly seen these harms firsthand and were aware of them much earlier. The race of Latinos is constructed to the picture of an illegal migrant ‘hopping’ the border and seems to only become more and more representative of the Latino population. The fact that race is constructed for these rhetorics may be the reason why it seems Latinxs are not able to assimilate into American culture, no matter how long their families have been living here. It has to do with policies and money and utilizing migrant labor rather than accepting these people. And while this does occur to all migrants, chicanxs, according to evidence suffer more. This is most likely because ever since the brown power movement (made by Chicanxs) that was adjacent to the black power movement of the nineteen-sixties, Chicanx people believed that their voice would be the power of reason and the ability to help uplift their communities. After all, they were the new Americans. However, this was not true and has subjected American-born Mexican people of southern California to some of the worst success rates of the entire Latino community. Chicanos will always be subject to the abuse and racism that newly arrived migrants receive, and because the race has been constructed as brown = terrorist or immigrant, it can not be dissected and worked on to differentiate any minor select group of Latinos. While this research proves that the impact of immigration has an extremely negative impact on the psyche of Chicanx people, remember that this is not to mitigate the extent of what migrants have experienced, legally or not. The institution of empirical borders is abhorrent and harms all people, but in this case, it shows the extent to which the view or talking points of migration have on people who have been born here, resulting in the conclusion that as long as you are ‘racially passing’ which is a concept that changes from person to person, you are subject to racism and hatred for fear that you are an illegal migrant who came to the united states, no matter how long you have been here or how American you believe you are.
Works Cited
Jose G. Hernandez, P.h.D., interview by recording
Olivia Acuna, interview by recording
Maria Siqueiros Acuna, interview by recording
Rodriguez, Richard. Hunger of Memory. Bantam Dell, February 1982
Subtractive Schooling by Angela Venezuela, Angela. Subtractive Schooling. State University of New York 1999
"Hispanics Education." Pew Research, 16 Aug. 2023, www.pewresearch.org/hispanic/chart/us-hispanics-education/. Accessed 3 Oct. 2023.
Walia, Harsha (2021). Border and Rule. Part 3, Capitalist Globalization and Insourcing of Migrant Labor. Chapter 7 (131-145): Temporary Labor Migration.
Mora, Lauren. “Key Facts about U.S. Latinos with Graduate Degrees.” Pew Research Center, Pew Research Center, 3 Oct. 2023, www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/10/03/key-facts-about-us-latinos-with-graduate-degrees/.
(Burnam et al., 1987; Finch, Kolody, & Vega, 2000; Portes & Rumbaut, 2006).
Perez, William, et al. Undocumented Latino College Students: Their Socioemotional and Academic Experiences, LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2011. ProQuest Ebook Central,
"Out of Sight and Out of Mind An Interpretative Human Rights Report on US-Mexico Border Violence under MPP and Title 42." D2L.Arizona.Edu, 1 May 2023, d2l.arizona.edu/d2l/le/content/1306632/viewContent/15249074/View. Accessed 12 Oct. 2023.
"Anchor Babies Over Breeders and the Population Bomb." D2L.Arizona.Edu, 1 May 2023, d2l.arizona.edu/d2l/le/content/1306632/viewContent/14695753/View. Accessed 3 Nov. 2023.
"Legal Passing Navigating Undocumented Life and Local Immigration Law." EBSCOhost, 1 May 2023, ezproxy.library.arizona.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=e025xna&AN=2069756&site=ehost-live&ebv=EB&ppid=pp_Cover. Accessed 7 Nov. 2023.
Comments
Post a Comment