Skip to main content

My last post discussed how the racism we see today developed. This post focuses on the plight of Mexicans and Mexican-Americans. I share it because the issue of illegal immigration is still very much in the news.

For the majority of the past hundred years illegal immigration from Mexico to the United States has been a contentious issue. The debate over Mexican immigrants and their descendants has included overt racism, economic concerns and humanitarian considerations. Long before Latin American immigration became part of the public consciousness, the image of Mexicans as an uncivilized and detestable race developed. Starting in the early 19th century white Americans began to transfer their Anglo-Saxon dominated worldview and its belief in the inferiority of others from the Africans and Native Americans to the Mexican people who they saw as an impediment to progress. The racism of both sides is evident in their arguments. Politicians argued that Mexicans were slow, lazy and more likely to end up on welfare or commit crimes, while farm owners argued that the lower mental capacity of the Mexican made him ideal for repetitive manual labor in the fields. The result of these racist beliefs was the reparation and deportation movement of the 1930s. Politicians, fearing civil unrest caused by the Great Depression, found a scapegoat in the Mexican and Mexican American populations.  Due to an absolute disregard for basic human rights by both sides, thousands of legal and illegal Mexican immigrants fled to Mexico out of fear.

In the 1830s and 40s Americans began to adopt Anglo-Saxon mythology as a way of defining their cultural heritage. The Anglo-Saxon myth stated that whites of northern European lineage were the descendants of a noble race of man that extended back to ancient times. They were the superior people - the children of Adam - and all other races were inferior by divine will. This identity was coming into focus as white Americans were attempting to find justification for enslaving Africans and for the massacres and forceful relocation of Native Americans in the name of progress. Blacks and Indians were seen as inferior and not of the same species as Europeans and European Americans.

When settlers and investors began looking west for land and resources and realized that Mexico did not share their interests, the notion of inferiority was quickly transferred to the Mexican people as a way to justify expelling them from the region. The historian Reginald Horsman argues that “While the Anglo-Saxons were depicted as the purest of the pure – the finest Caucasians – the Mexicans who stood in the way of Southern expansion were depicted as a mongrel race, adulterated by extensive intermarriage with an inferior Indian race.” They were seen as half-breeds: part Indian, part black, and incapable of building a proper society.

One result of this racial ideology was the Texas Revolution. The state of Texas was part of Mexico in the mid 1820s. To settle the territory the Mexican government enticed people from the United States to settle in colonies. These early settlers brought with them the Anglo-Saxon mythology and soon began to believe they could better utilize the land than the Mexicans. In 1835, under the leadership of Sam Houston, they revolted against the Mexican government. Houston was a firm supporter of the Anglo-Saxon myth and believed in the inferiority of the Mexican people. To him the revolution was part of the inevitable expansion of the white, Anglo-Saxon race across the continent. Stating that the Texans were fighting against what he called oppression and tyranny in the name of liberty “borne by the Anglo-Saxon race”, Houston’s beliefs serve as a representation of the racial worldview held by white America at the time.

As had happened with Texas, Mexico’s territory from New Mexico to California, from Western Colorado to Oregon, was viewed by Americans as their birthright. During the debate over annexing Texas into the United States in early 1840s politician John L. Sullivan gave a name to this belief: Manifest Destiny. This was the notion that the United States, the true home of the Anglo Saxon race, had a God given right to all of the land from the east to the west coast.

At this time there was a national debate going on in Congress over going to war with Mexico in order to claim more western lands. The Americans had no doubt they would win a war. Horsman tells us, “The general assumption in the cabinet that Mexico would not fight the United States, or at worst could easily be defeated, was reflected in public opinion throughout the country.” Added to this was the belief that “the Mexicans lacked the innate ability to benefit from the opportunity to be given them by liberating American armies.” This racist ideology was evident on both sides of the war debate. Mississippi Senator Robert Walker saw taking Mexico as a way to purge the northern states of both free blacks and slaves, arguing that the inferior blacks would be happier with the Mexicans who were more like them. Another argument made, as recorded in the Democratic Review, was that the invading soldiers would stay in occupied Mexico and breed with the Mexican women, “gradually infusing vigor into the race, regenerating the whole nation.”

Representing the views of the anti-war side of the debate, Senator John C. Calhoun argued, “We do not want the people of Mexico, either as citizens or subjects. All we want is a portion of territory…with a population the would soon recede, or identify with ours.”  Neither the option of statehood, making the Mexican population citizens, nor governing Mexico as a colony - that reminded many of England and the American Revolution - was considered acceptable. Eventually a compromise was reached: the U.S. would take all of Mexico’s territory north of the Rio Grande River. In doing so America would acquire the most area of land with the least amount of Mexicans on it. The US won the war in 1848, and this victory reinforced the perception of Mexicans as inferior.

There was very little immigration from Mexico northward for the next thirty years due mainly to lack of transportation options available for crossing the Sonoran Desert of northern Mexico. Railroads built in the 1880s connected Mexico to US cities from Texas to California, allowing for quicker and safer travel between the two countries. At the same time the railroad companies began to employ Mexicans to build railroads in the U.S. According to research by historian Abraham Hoffman, the employment of Mexican labor by western railroad companies grew from 1.1 percent in 1909 to over 59 percent in 1929. Mexico’s economy was stagnant in the early 1900s and Hoffman states that many Mexicans fled north to escape the “the hacendado control of lands and the chronic poverty of Mexican rural life.” In addition the agricultural development in California, Arizona, and other states created a tremendous demand for cheap Mexican immigrant labor.

During the industrial and agricultural expansion of the mid 19th to early 20th centuries many immigrant groups were competing for work in the US. Tens of thousands of Chinese immigrated between 1850 and 1882 to build railroads and work on farms. After a depression in the 1870s led to legislation barring Chinese immigrants, Japanese laborers came to dominate the work force. The Japanese were followed by immigrant laborers from Korea and India until the Immigration Act of 1917 heavily restricted the immigration of people considered non-white. However, Mexicans were classified as white by the federal government and therefore exempt from the quota system the act established. This exemption had been negotiated by representatives of the growers associations and industrial companies with the Department of Labor to ensure a steady supply of cheap labor.  

This development happened for several reasons. Geographically, Mexico is literally next-door to America; immigrant laborers only had to travel by land, which compared to the long sea voyage Asian and European immigrants had to endure was cheaper and faster. Economically, life in Mexico was very hard; wages were low and the people and land were being exploited by one regime after another. To draw these workers north companies in the US employed firms to hire people in Mexico and ship them by train to California, Florida, and Texas; anywhere field workers or tracklayers were needed. The Mexicans for their part accepted the hard work and low pay because they could still earn more than they could in Mexico. Their dream was not to become American citizens. Most planned to return home some day and buy land to start their own farms.

At that time in America Mexicans were seen as inferior, meant only for the hardest labor, and for work that no white man would do. They could not get better jobs no matter what skills they had. Some did manage to prosper but they were the minority. Most of the Mexicans in the US lived in ghettos and barrios in the cities or they traveled the country as migrant labor, planting and harvesting crops with the seasons.

The passage of the Immigration Act of 1917 slowed the immigration boom from Eastern Europe and Asia but it did not place quotas on any countries in North America. And with the outbreak of World War I the U.S. turned to Mexico to fill its war time labor needs as immigration from Europe almost completely stopped.

After the war the labor unions started to push harder for Mexican immigration laws to be passed. They saw the cheap labor as a major threat to their members. Mexicans would work for much lower wages and in far worse conditions than the unions would accept and so the Chamber of Commerce worked to block immigration reform. To the Chamber and farm owners the Mexicans were essential to progress; they didn’t complain, they worked for next to nothing, and it was argued they would return home to Mexico every winter instead of settling in towns and cities.  

When the US won the Mexican-American war a political line was drawn across land that had been occupied for millennia, first by the Native Americans and more recently by the Mexican people. Even after the war people that had ties to either side of the border traveled freely back and forth to visit family and work. To them there was no border, just the land their families had lived and worked on for generations.  Neither government did much to enforce the border. The US government passed some restrictions, but with little money for enforcement there was not much they could do to stop the movement across the border.  Since Mexicans were seen as inferior, almost no effort had been made at the state of federal level to incorporate the Mexicans that had become Americans after the war into the culture. With people moving so freely back and forth the government found it extremely difficult to identify who was an American citizen and who was not.

This was of little consequence because most Americans never accepted the Mexican Americans as citizens to begin with. Even though children born in the US have birthright citizenship, they were still seen as lesser people. Mexican-Americans were grouped together with blacks and Indians; all were seen as inferior and not able to be assimilated into society. In states like Texas and California Mexican and Mexican-Americans were segregated from white children in school. Even though whites generally received higher pay and held the better jobs, they still resented and looked down upon the Mexican people.

In the 1920s politicians began to push harder to stop illegal immigrants from coming north for work. Several bills were submitted in Congress to create a North American quota system. Racism was evident in this too as Canadians, who were white and of the same lineage as Americans, were not to be included in this system. And while many said there should be a quota system for all immigrants, others countered that the Latin American countries south of Mexico should not be included so as to not interfere with commerce with those countries.  

Illegal immigrants were beginning to be seen as a real threat to the nation’s well being. The Border Patrol was established in 1925 to slow illegal immigrants from Mexico, though at first they had little funding or personnel to patrol the thousands of miles of territory along the U.S.-Mexico border. Illegal immigrants were often blamed for high crime rates in America. This view was factually contradicted by a study ordered by President Herbert Hoover in 1931 - the Wickersham Commission - which proved that there was no truth to these claims. This led Dr. Edith Abbot, who conducted the factual survey for the report, to state that, “It is easier to charge our crime record against immigrants than against an inefficient and corrupt system of police and an outworn system of criminal justice.”

Throughout the 1920s the Mexican government began offering incentives to lure its people home with land offers and employment in public works programs. Then in 1929 the Great Depression started. Mexicans had always been the first fired and this time was no different. Many Mexican and Mexican-Americans quickly found themselves without work; because of this many headed back to Mexico.

Those that left returned home for two primary reasons. First, there was no work in the US and the Mexican government was offering land. Without work many people found themselves in need of financial support from the government and welfare organizations. Returning south meant a chance to start again in Mexico.

The second was an active drive to force them to leave the country. The first successful policy adopted to stop the flow of immigrants was a ban on all visas for Mexicans wishing to work in the U.S. This had a drastic effect on the immigration flow, reducing immigration from Mexico dramatically from 1929 to 1931. The given reason for this policy change was that most immigrants would end up public charges. In addition many Mexicans were heading south, repatriating on their own. By 1930-31 the flow was actually negative, with more people heading south than north.

Meanwhile, President Hoover found himself on the defensive from labor unions. To appease them, he told Secretary of State William Doak to figure out a way to rid the country of its immigrant population with the belief that this would open jobs for unemployed Americans. Secretary Doak stated that there were 400K illegal immigrants in the country. If they were gone, he said, then the employment problem would end.

Some took his words at their face value. In Los Angeles the Chamber of Commerce and city officials set up a relief committee - the Los Angeles Citizens Committee on Coordination of Unemployment Relief - to assist people with job searches. Its mission was to connect workers with employers. The man put in charge of this organization, Charles P. Visel, read Doak’s words and decided that there must be at least twenty thousand illegal immigrants in Los Angeles alone. He set out to do something about it.  Visel wrote letters to the President’s Emergency Committee for employment, stating that there was local law enforcement support for federal help in removing the illegal Mexicans from Los Angeles. Visel also devised a plan that would have the feds announce raids in the paper and on the radio to create fear and drive people to flee back across the boarder. He even went so far as to release his own statement to the press claiming that law enforcement was ready to start a major deportation campaign in the city.

Thanks to Visel’s efforts federal and local law enforcement met in Los Angeles in January 1931.  Once they realized the full extent of Visel’s plan the local police were reluctant to take part in the plot. But the federal official in charge, Supervisor William F. Watkins of the Bureau of Immigration, decided to investigate Visel’s claims. At first the raids did little more than create panic; few actual illegal immigrants were caught. The Spanish press and the Mexican government were infuriated.  But the majority of Americans, who had bought in on the notion that deporting all of the illegal Mexican immigrants would free up jobs and lower the welfare burden, supported the raids.

From LA the raids and ensuing deportations diffused across the country; along with them the repatriation movement spread. These two actions had the same goal: to rid the country of unwanted Mexicans regardless of their actual citizenship status. The repatriation process was viewed as a way to move people back to Mexico legally as quickly as possible. Many state governments even paid for trains to move Mexicans south, with fifteen such trains leaving from California between 1931 and 1933.   The justification was that it would save the government money in the long run to ship all of the Mexicans home, essentially removing them from welfare rolls. The Mexican government supported this but the promises of land and opportunity back in Mexico rarely panned out. Returning people found they had few friends or family back home that could take them in due to difficult economic times.  And many people in Mexico actually resented the returning people, partly because of the differences in culture that had developed and partly because they didn’t want the employment competition any more than the Americans did.

The deportation campaign meant physically catching illegal immigrants, trying them in court, and then deporting them. Those that repatriated had the chance of one day returning while those deported were barred from ever coming back. Figuring out who was illegal turned out to be challenging. Due to years of changing laws and an essentially open border, many Mexican people had been in the country for years, in some cases their whole lives. Furthermore, many of them had had children who were legal residents.

The raids were chaotic. Anyone who looked Mexican was rounded up. They were taken from factories, from fields, or off the streets. Many families simply did not have fathers or brothers return home from work, leaving women and children to fend for themselves. Since little distinction was made between Mexicans and Mexican- Americans, legal citizens who could not produce the correct paperwork and who could not afford a lawyer were deported. In addition families had to make the choice of either splitting up or taking children who were legally Americans back to a country they did not know. Since they were not welcomed in Mexico either they became without a country. They were looked down upon in Mexico because they didn’t want to be there and this offended the Mexicans.  

During the height of the deportations politicians and commentators gave speeches and wrote articles blaming all that ailed the country on illegal immigrants. In 1935 Congressman Martin Dies from Texas in wrote a piece for the Saturday Evening Post in which he stated, “There are 3,500,000 foreigners who came to this country illegally and with utter disregard for our laws… Among this number are hundreds of gangsters, murderers and thieves, who are unfit to live in this country and, God knows, unfit to die in any country.” To Dies “relentless war without quarter and without cessation must be waged upon them until the last one is driven from our shores.” Due to widespread instances of inflammatory rhetoric such as this many people left the country, even if they were legal citizens, out of fear and intimidation.  

Deportations decreased with the election of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, partially due to a decline in immigration northward and less desire on the government’s part to split up families. The exact numbers of how many people fled the U.S. from 1929 to 1939 are not known but estimates range from one to two million with tens of thousands more deported. And after all of this when World War II began demand again increased for cheap Mexican labor to support the war effort.  

A cycle had been started, one that continues to this day. The Mexican people are wanted when business is good but are expected to go back to Mexico the second the economy dips. Little distinction was made then, or is made now, between Mexicans and Mexican- Americans. Just as in the 1930s, during the current global recession we see illegal immigrants being blamed for increases in the costs of education, welfare and health care. And many in society continue to blame them for high crime rates and lowering education standards. The historian Camille Guerin-Gonzales said that in the early 20th century migrant workers from Mexico found “that if they were willing to work harder than Anglo-Americans, to have a standard of living lower than Anglo-Americans, and to not challenge the political, social, or economic standing of Anglo-Americans, they could survive in the U.S.” Those words ring just as true about the status of the Mexican in America today.

Source Material:

Books:
Balderrama, Francisco E. and Raymond Rodriguez. Decade of Betrayal: Mexican Repatriation in the 1930s. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1995.

Guerin-Gonzales, Camille. Mexican Workers and American Dreams: Immigration, Repatriation, and California Farm Labor, 1900-1939. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1994.

Hoffman, Abraham. Unwanted Mexican Americans in the Great Depression: Repatriation Pressures 1929-1939. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press, 1974.

Horsman, Reginald. Race and Manifest Destiny: The Origins of American Racial Anglo-Saxonism. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1981.

Livingstone, David N. Adam’s Ancestors: Race, Religion, and the Politics of Human Origins. Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press, 2008.

Smedley, Audrey. Race in North America: Origin and Evolution of a Worldview. 2nd ed. Boulder: Westview Press, 1999.

Articles:
“Confusing Immigration Restrictions.” New York Times 19 Apr 1930: 15.

“Defends Alien Ban as Aid to Jobless.” New York Times. 7 Dec 1930: 47.

Dies, Martin. “The Immigration Crises.” Saturday Evening Post 20 Apr 1935: 27+.

“Flow of Aliens Turned Outward.” New York Times 16 May 1931: 38.

“35,000 Mexicans Leave California.” New York Times 12 Apr 1931: 5.

“Wickersham Board Frees Foreign-Born if Big Crime Blame.” New York Times 24 Apr 1931: 1+.

If you made it this far thanks for reading and please share your thoughts and opinions in the comments.

Originally posted to Barriers and Bridges on Sun Oct 02, 2011 at 06:31 AM PDT.

Also republished by History for Kossacks, Baja Arizona Kossacks, America Latina, LatinoKos, and Community Spotlight.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Question (6+ / 0-)

    I have read that many people who were American citizens were illegally deported to Mexico in the 1930's. Have you heard of this, and are there/were there any legal remedies to this?

    -1.63/ -1.49 "Speaking truth to power" (with snark of course)!

    by dopper0189 on Sun Oct 02, 2011 at 07:13:14 AM PDT

  •  Ulysses S. Grant (5+ / 0-)
    The Mexican War was one of the most unjust wars ever waged by a stronger against a weaker nation.

    Grant was in every battle of the Mexican War except Buena Vista.

    "Remember Bob. No fear, no envy, no meanness" Liam Clancy to Bob Dylan

    by BOHICA on Sun Oct 02, 2011 at 09:32:35 AM PDT

    •  Texas settlers wanted to own slaves (13+ / 0-)

      in Mexico-governed Texas.  That's why the Texans at that time wanted to be part of the American government instead of Mexico.  Mexico was against slavery.

      Also, gold had been discovered in California and the American government desperately wanted the upper part of California.  

      The American government offered to buy California, Texas, New Mexico from Mexico but Mexico refused to sell.  

      It took only a small tiny exchange of gunfire on the border to give a reason for the U.S. President to push for war.  The slave states wanted another state, like a new state of Texas, to have slaves as well to strengthen their position of holding slaves as a majority in the Congress.

      Abraham Lincoln in Congress and John Quincy Adams also in Congress were against the war and could not understand why the USA would want to fight with their neighbors but were overruled.  

      Mexico put up a costly fight with the USA, but lost and in the end, USA still had to pay a lot for the land grab.  The Mexican American War is still held out by Mexicans as a war of aggression.

      Because Mexico had seen enough Europeans come into their country over the years and then try to take control of it,(French and the Spanish), they kept to a "no immigration" policy which kept them stagnet and the country did not grow and flourish unlike the USA which did have immigration especially from "whites."

      Mexico could have been annexed at the end of the war but due to their "mixed race" and more importantly, the fact that Mexicans were Catholic, the Mexicans were not wanted.

       

      •  Great Information (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Ignacio Magaloni, YucatanMan

        Thank you for adding it here. The attitudes of the war supports amazed me. They believed that the land was meant to be worked to its full extent literally by divine will. God made that land so it could be exploited for profit. And if the Mexican government wasn't going to let them do it then they would just take it. Rid the east of slaves and free blacks? Bonus.  

        "The next time everyone will pay for it equally, and there won't be any more Chosen Nations, or any Others. Poor bastards all." ~The Boomer Bible

        by just another vet on Sun Oct 02, 2011 at 10:55:23 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Good Diary But It Gets Complex (11+ / 0-)

    I agree with much of this and it provides good historical background.  Extending the time period from 1930 to present era would pull up a lot of other information to support this general thesis.  For example:

    - Mexican Americans participated in large numbers in WW2, especially in units like the Texas based 36th Infantry Division which fought in North Africa and Italy.  But their presence was largely invisible in the movies made on the war.  An example was Guy Gabaldon,a  Mexican American Pacific War hero whose story was portrayed in the movie by a white actor Tab Hunter.  This "invisibility" is a reason why it is so easy for Tea Party types and nativists to continue to portray the Mexican as "the other"

    - a large number of Mexican citizens came north during WW2 and enlisted in the US military - few questions were asked about who was or was not a US citizen.  The idea that the USA looks the other way when it needs the Mexican was never truer...

    That said, the issue of race and class in the Americas is very complex.  And Mexicans are caught up in it not just as the oppressed, but as oppressors.

    Mexico's history is interwoven with the struggles between the lighter-skinned versus the darker.  Even today, when you go to Mexico the phrase "que Indio" ("what an Indian") is used as an insult.  This is of course a phenomenon throughout the Americas.  Check out Mexican TV sometime and you will think the country is made up of blonde people.  So we also have what you would call the "internal racism."  This is something the African American community wrestles with as well.

    So yes, we should target anti-Mexican racism.  But we need to go further and realize it shouldn't stop there.  It is not progress to have Mexican American politicians elected if they perpetuate the class and ethnic discrimination that has existed within the community as well.

    I say this because I am wary of this becoming a "Mexicans versus the Anglos" meme.  That would be unfair.

    "Hidden in the idea of radical openness is an allegiance to machines instead of people." - Jaron Lanier

    by FDRDemocrat on Sun Oct 02, 2011 at 10:16:38 AM PDT

    •  Whatever happened to Mariachi Mama? (6+ / 0-)

      I loved reading what she wrote.

      But in late 2006, my wife & I went to a resort town in Mexico.  I can kinda sorta pretty much read Spanish.  I see all these signs that say:

      Se busca empleado/a.  Se requiere buena presentacion

      Huh?  Why do you need to know Powerpoint to work in a bikini shop/bar/restaurant/liquor store?

      When I mentioned this one day on this site, Mariachi Mama set me straight.  

      It's Dog Whistle for "Only light skinned applicants need apply."  

    •  A Part 2 (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mary Mike

      I would very much enjoy taking this research further as you recommend. The era I focused on caught my attention from a childrens book my wife was reading for a literature class, "Esperanza Rising".

      And my intention has never been to try and create a divide. For me studying history is about discovering our shared journey. We had to get here somehow, and figuring that out helps put today's events in context. Since there was a major discussion of 'race' going on I thought it might be beneficial to add some back story if you will. Granted, these issues are far more complex than could be encompassed and addressed in one diary.

      "The next time everyone will pay for it equally, and there won't be any more Chosen Nations, or any Others. Poor bastards all." ~The Boomer Bible

      by just another vet on Sun Oct 02, 2011 at 10:45:02 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  that has always and everywhere been the case (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      just another vet

      nothing prevents one "ethnicity" to use the same racial brand markers against those, they see as a threat to their own privileges in comparison to another ethnic groups. It's pretty obvious that you can be victim and victimizer at the same time.

      You can observe different ethnic groups, who lived peaceful together, apparently having achieved a balanced way of sustaining each others needs for survival and social harmony. Once there is an imbalance created (mostly by outside sources not under their control), you can be sure, one side at least invokes racially motivated argumentation against the other, to make clear they would have more rights and privileges for something that sustains their livelihood than the other.

      This has always been successfully used for third party manipulators to incite racial divisions between two groups that both have been exploited. If you don't want your exploited people become a threat to yourself, divide them. Racial invocation of differences between them, works wonders.

      You know, like, if I can get the two groups hate each other like let's say Africans and Indians, both won't become such a threat to us White Africans. (South Africa) A colored ladder of ascending grade of racist brand markers is developed, from white mostly christian on the one end to black "cannibals" on the other.

      And if you can't find anymore a clear enough racial marker, you add something else, like cultural and behavioural differences. (done always among Europeans).

      You can observe that among African tribes, among Asian races, as well as between mixed race and pure race people.

      You just have to dig up close and you see the shades. From far it's white against blacks, from close up it gets 'more colorful", but not more complex, it's always the same process and mechanism, imo.

      I don't agree with you that the "Mexican vs. Anglo" meme
      of this diary is unfair.

      It's a normal human reaction to see racism directed to yourself (being the victimized) first and, imo, for all the right reasons, because it's your life and survival that is affected and endangered by it. Racism is, as politics, really a local, personal matter.

      It is YOU, who think, that if one ethnic groups claims to be victim of racial discrimination, that would mean by default that the same ethnic group couldn't use same raciial brand makers against other groups under different cricumstances. The can and they might do, but you, as not being among the victims, just don't allow yourself to point that out.  

      That would be just too brutal to remind a victim that he too can be victimizer. Not the right time and right place and probably not the right person to do it.

      And if something like this happens, rest assured, those who are victimized and others, will notice and the process repeats itself.

    •  During WWII, Mexican laborers literally fed the (3+ / 0-)

      USA when farms could not be operated due to the number of men in our military.  

      Once we had won WWII and established ourselves as the leading world superpower, Eisenhower gratefully conceived "Operation Wetback" (real name) to deport Mexicans en masse.  Many actual US citizens were caught up in the sweeps.

      Yet another reason that our current immigration policies are utterly unjust:  Many actual US citizens and their descendents should be eligible to legally return to the USA, but the paper trails have all but been obliterated.

      Progress occurs when courageous, skillful leaders seize the opportunity to change things for the better. -- Harry S Truman

      by YucatanMan on Sun Oct 02, 2011 at 10:04:43 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I am very grateful to read this here. (4+ / 0-)

    Such a detailed summary of historical events regarding the fate of Mexicans and American-Mexicans in the US, I would never be able to find easily and get that much valuable information. Thank you also for giving information of your source material. I really, really love this place. Great job.

    And the racial argumentation of being inferior invoked for reason of gaining wealth out of the land, profits out of the labor and political privileges to be able to retain all of it "legally and consitutionally", works  in both directions (for getting the cheap labor force into the US and for getting them out). It is just one more proof, that racial brand markers are used and invoked and incited in any case, for the only reason to make profit and justify whatever they wanted to do to "keep the Mexican in their place".

    Racist justifications always "work". A win-win situation for the profiteers, as long as it serves to gain or keep privileges and wealth in their own pockets and tickles their superiority complex. It just feels so good to be smarter, holier and superior to others, right? So, let's make those myths up and base them on to fit your desires, invoke Godliness or "scientifically" based data of biological inferiority and, bang, we got a winner.

    Politicians argued that Mexicans were slow, lazy and more likely to end up on welfare or commit crimes, while farm owners argued that the lower mental capacity of the Mexican made him ideal for repetitive manual labor in the fields. The result of these racist beliefs was the reparation and deportation movement of the 1930s.

    It couldn't be said shorter and more to the point.  

    Thanks.

    •  And it continues today (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mimi, YucatanMan, TexMex

      what really got me was the piece by Rep. Dies. Same things being said today almost word for word. The more things change....

      And thank you for reading and commenting. Always good to hear one's work is appreciated.

      "The next time everyone will pay for it equally, and there won't be any more Chosen Nations, or any Others. Poor bastards all." ~The Boomer Bible

      by just another vet on Sun Oct 02, 2011 at 11:00:57 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I didn't know until (5+ / 0-)

    relatively recently that Mexicans were actively recruited to come to my are during WWI.  So many men were off fighting and the company that made the carriage assemblies for railroad cars here was in desperate need of workers.  

    When the war ended, many of those workers stayed and ended up doing the kind of backbreaking, soul-killing work you describe.  By the time the second generation (grandchildren of the immigrants) came along, they were just part of our community.  They have been accepted as part of "us" until recently.  

    The new influx of immigrants is bringing out the latent racism, mostly, I think, because it keeps getting stoked by the RW yappers.  Having done some of the kind of field work that these folks do, I can guarantee that none of those yappers would do such work, nor would they allow anyone they love to do so.  If you've never topped onions in 100 degree heat for next to nothing a bushel, you cannot possibly appreciate how grueling it is.  That doesn't even count the real possibility of losing one or more digits to an amazingly sharp knife...

    -7.62, -7.28 "Hold fast to dreams, for if dreams die, life is a broken winged bird that cannot fly." -Langston Hughes

    by luckylizard on Sun Oct 02, 2011 at 10:28:16 AM PDT

  •  Excellent and .... (6+ / 0-)

    Strangely coincidental since since I have been drafting a series of 2 diaries to cover the history of racism and (unique) policies of exclusion of Asian Americans (particularly Chinese) which paralleled and was intertwined with the subject of this diary.

    In fact, I had originally planned to publish my first diary today but had some problems contacting Armando to work out the review and publication process - perhaps you have seen my notes to him in the group message traffic?

    In any case, my diary will compliment and amplify the issues of your own as some of the legal cases and changes in law that affected both groups were based on various case law actions filed my Mexican-Americans, Chinese-Americans, Japanese-Americanas and Indian-Americans.

    Do you mind me asking here how you published?  Did you draft to the Group page and then have Armando publish or did you publish to your own page and then he re-published?  I'm not sure of the process for this group (my other groups I have leader or editor status!).

    My first diary is ready to go but now I've delayed it which is just as well since you published this today.

    But FYI, my first diary will cover the period from the 1880s through the 1970s (the foundation period of systematic discrimination) and then the second diary from the 1980s to present, when various changes in law and historical events forced systematic and social change.

    Significantly, some of the laws designed to discriminate against Asians (mainly Chinese, Japanese and Koreans but a lesser extent Indians) were also used to discriminate against native born Mexican-Americans and the landmark case that finally opened the door for Asians was, in fact, a case in California of a mixed-mariage Mexican-American and African-American couple refused a marriage license who ultimately challenged the basis of ethnic identification relating to the discriminatory laws, opening Pandora's Box.

    Very interesting history, and not, I'm afraid, very well understood by the average American.

    You cannot understand the cultural suppression and repression of these groups, including their tendency to fail at complete assimilation unless you understand the systematic discrimination and racism they lived with for decades.

    And sadly, these issues still frame immigration debates and influence the attitudes of many Liberals (none of us are immune to prejudice of one sort or another).

    Tipped and Recced.

    What about my Daughter's future?

    by koNko on Sun Oct 02, 2011 at 10:43:51 AM PDT

  •  One other question (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    just another vet, MKSinSA

    I just noticed this diary is published using the "Barriers and Bridges" Group not the "Discussing Race At Daily Kos" group (of which I am a member and your previous diary was published to).

    Do you know what is happening with the latter group? It seems the last diary was yours and now I haven't got response to my PMs posted to this group so I'm wondering if we should continue it or if I should join and post to this group.

    Any advice you can offer is appreciated.

    Thanks & Regards.

    What about my Daughter's future?

    by koNko on Sun Oct 02, 2011 at 10:50:24 AM PDT

    •  you have to be a member of Armando's group (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MKSinSA, koNko

      and your diary can be published there only directly as a member. Armondo doesn't republish any diary from the outside public to his group. His rules. Sternly enforced. :-)

      •  Oh, I think I miss read your comments (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MKSinSA, koNko

        and maybe that's why he isn't publishing me since I got published first by Barriers. By the sound of your diary theme I bet it will get republished by both Barriers and History for Kossaks, especially if you contact them first.  

        "The next time everyone will pay for it equally, and there won't be any more Chosen Nations, or any Others. Poor bastards all." ~The Boomer Bible

        by just another vet on Sun Oct 02, 2011 at 11:50:31 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Let's see (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mimi, MKSinSA, koNko

      When I wrote the first 'race' submission I used the queue function for Discussing Race At Daily Kos. So it didn't show up anywhere until Armando published it to the group at a time when I knew I could be here to reply to comments. The second time I had already joined Bridges and Barriers so I queued to both groups. As you noticed the folks at Barriers published it. I don't know where Armando is today. He replied to a message of mine late last night, but last time I checked I am indeed still queued. I am still planning on publishing to that group when relevant.

      Ask to join a couple groups. Barriers is great, as is History For Kossaks. I say the more groups you get republished by the more eyes will see it. Of course you can always go ahead and publish on your own and be republished to other groups after the fact. I am still working out how to set up a specific time. Since I hadn't worked out a time for this one I got lucky that it was published when I can be here.

      "The next time everyone will pay for it equally, and there won't be any more Chosen Nations, or any Others. Poor bastards all." ~The Boomer Bible

      by just another vet on Sun Oct 02, 2011 at 11:27:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Thanks for your reply. (0+ / 0-)

        Actually I'm already a member of Armando's group but I think he has been busy the past few days.

        So I just joined Barriers and Bridges and will cross-post to both next weekend as I won't have the time to respond this week. Unfortunately my time zone and working schedule makes it difficult to publish and respond weekdays.

        Thanks for your suggestions and response.

        See you.

        What about my Daughter's future?

        by koNko on Mon Oct 03, 2011 at 12:27:23 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Great diary, thanks. (3+ / 0-)

    It's like clock-work, isn't it?

    The cynical politicians, and interests of the status quo, generally, stoke anti-immigrant sentiment whenever the economy is down and people are feeling pinched.

    It's here they got the range/ and the machinery for change/ and it's here they got the spiritual thirst. --Leonard Cohen

    by karmsy on Sun Oct 02, 2011 at 11:52:38 AM PDT

  •  If anyone stumbles in here this afternoon (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    YucatanMan

    I will be out hunting and gathering for a few hours. I'll be back this evening to check on things.

    "The next time everyone will pay for it equally, and there won't be any more Chosen Nations, or any Others. Poor bastards all." ~The Boomer Bible

    by just another vet on Sun Oct 02, 2011 at 11:57:12 AM PDT

  •  Couple of comments. (3+ / 0-)

    The prime reason the Texians stole Texas because slavery was illegal in Mexico, so those guys at the Alamo died for the sacred right to own other people.

    Most Mexicans, indeed, most Hispanics, are ethnically native Americans, who settled the Americas 15,000 or so years before any Europeans stumbled on the place.  The idea that the movements of people indigenous to the New World are regulated by European carpetbaggers is the quintessence of hypocrisy.

    I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever. ~Thomas Jefferson

    by bobdevo on Sun Oct 02, 2011 at 01:37:05 PM PDT

    •  Not sure I completely follow (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      YucatanMan, bobdevo

      So I hope this comment makes sense as a reply to yours. I think I addressed part of this:

      When the US won the Mexican-American war a political line was drawn across land that had been occupied for millennia, first by the Native Americans and more recently by the Mexican people. Even after the war people that had ties to either side of the border traveled freely back and forth to visit family and work.

      They were already there and continued to live their lives as they always had. After the war the issue of controlling migration, rights, access to resources, etc. developed by those mentioned carpetbaggers as a means of control. Still going on today. Even though they and their ancestors had been on the land for thousands of years, the justification used was that they had no right to the land and its resources because of Manifest Destiny. Indigenous people have been displaced throughout history, here most recently by invading Europeans and their descendants. That is the most important point here.

      "The next time everyone will pay for it equally, and there won't be any more Chosen Nations, or any Others. Poor bastards all." ~The Boomer Bible

      by just another vet on Sun Oct 02, 2011 at 02:35:40 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Oh, wait (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      YucatanMan, bobdevo

      I didn't catch this at first, "Most Mexicans, indeed, most Hispanics, are ethnically native Americans". When I was thinking of Mexicans I was referring to those citizens of the nation Mexico. Different from an ethnic group.

      "The next time everyone will pay for it equally, and there won't be any more Chosen Nations, or any Others. Poor bastards all." ~The Boomer Bible

      by just another vet on Sun Oct 02, 2011 at 02:42:50 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Tipped, recce'd & republished. JAV, fantastic (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    just another vet, Mary Mike

    overview. Essential for understanding how we got where we are today with the immigration "problem." Thanks much.

    Meteor Blades seems to do an outstanding job of community moderation despite the abject failure to be perfect.

    by catilinus on Sun Oct 02, 2011 at 02:31:27 PM PDT

  •  Thanks for the information. n/t (0+ / 0-)

    My forthcoming book Obama's America: A Transformative Vision of Our National Identity will be published in Summer 2012 by Potomac Books.

    by Ian Reifowitz on Sun Oct 02, 2011 at 06:16:43 PM PDT

  •  Thanks wonderful piece! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    just another vet

    my old diary.
    I will never forget I was rich I had shoes. (Some links no longer work)

    http://www.dailykos.com/...?

  •  Excellent Piece (0+ / 0-)

    Thank you for your efforts to educate. Well written and very informative.

  •  Good overview but you left out (0+ / 0-)

    what caused the greatest exodus of mexicans, the Mexican revolution, 1910 to 1920. Between 1 and 3 million perished. Growing up in san Antonio I had many friends who can trace their arrival to that time frame. Their great grandparents took their grandparents and headed to the u.s.a.

    •  Thanks for the info (0+ / 0-)

      I am thinking about writing a part 2, which I was going to start at 1940. Perhaps I should add this instead and start with the revolution.

      "The next time everyone will pay for it equally, and there won't be any more Chosen Nations, or any Others. Poor bastards all." ~The Boomer Bible

      by just another vet on Tue Oct 04, 2011 at 03:49:52 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site