LEGAL ACTIVISTS OF COLOR
News, Events, Actions and Commentary on law and social justice. Welcome to the official blog of the United People of Color Caucus (TUPOCC) of the National Lawyers Guild.
Showing posts with label critical legal theory. Show all posts
Showing posts with label critical legal theory. Show all posts

Saturday, November 22, 2008

Uncovering the racism of nativism in the US

Recent reports about the murder of Marcelo Lucero in the TUPOCC Yahoo! group prompted me to ask us to consider how legal activists of color, and our friends, might use critical legal theory and our experiential insights to uncover the racism of US nativism and and change popular understandings of today's anti-immigrant movement.

I referred to a Facing Race conference workshop that some of us attended on this subject last week, and a compañero in New York just mentioned today's Black Alliance for Just Immigration (BAJI)'s conference on Galvanizing our Power for Action: Building Bridges between African-American and Immigrant Communities.

BAJI does great work, and I think we should all learn and talk about the relationship of US racism and nativism. In my Chicanos, Law, and Criminal Justice class at UC Berkeley, I teach about how the US has historically racialized Latinas/os vis-a-vis Indigenous and African peoples. In this post I share some resources and sketch my understanding of the racism of US nativism.


Let's start with the Anglo seizure of Tejas and the US invasion of México in the first half of the 19th century.  

(N.B. Before continuing, it's important to acknowledge that all history is highly complicated, and we have imperfect means from fragmented sources to know the past.  Certainly some Tejano elites joined Anglos in establishing Texas as an independent republic in 1836; similarly, the US-Mexican War had multiple factors.  However, as I have asserted, my critical analysis of these past events has led me to frame them as the Anglo seizure of Tejas y the US invasion de México.)

As many have written, relations between the US and México soured in that early to mid 19th century period.  In particular, numerous influential US congressmen railed against México as a nation of degenerate mongrels and expressed fear about incorporating territories with substantial numbers of them (us, colored folks).

I use a few excerpts to teach about this history, including Chapter Four, "Latinas/os" of Perea, Delgado, Harris, Stefancic & Wildman's Race and Races: Cases and Resources for a Diverse America, 2d ed. (2007), and the excerpt of Ian Haney López's The Social Construction of Race: Some Observations on Illusion, Fabrication, and Choice in Davis, Johnson & Martínez's A Reader on Race, Civil Rights, and American Law (2001).

The important point vis-a-vis conventional ideas about the "black-white binary" of race in the US today is that Latinas/os--particularly Mexicans and Puerto Ricans--in the 19th century challenged the US Anglo imaginary with a somewhat different dilemma than that posed by "the peculiar institution" of slavery.  

Instead of an internal non-white "minority," México y Porto Rico presented the specter of already racially-mixed societies.  And, according to the US Anglo conceptualization of race in the 19th century, the inferiority of a racially-mixed mongrel was even greater than that of a non-white Indian or African.  Contemporary ideas promulgated at that time held that mixing the races produced an inferior breed to any of the "pure" races.  

(Contrast these ideas with the 1990's celebration of multi-racial minorities, or the (re)discovery of bi-raciality.  In turn, understand that always already, folks be hella mixed.  Racial purity is a lie and an invidious illusion.)

From these first moments when the US incorporated of parts of México (starting with Tejas from 1836 to 1845, then including the lands ceded under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848 and finally those later acquired in the Compromise of 1850 and the Gadsen Purchase of 1853), the idea of US nativism became even more complexly tied to racism.  Previously the notion of US nativism was already fraught with contradictions given the genocide of Indigenous people and the situation of "native-born" African Americans, who were nonetheless legally excluded from enjoying their (our) human rights, including of course U.S. and state citizenship.

In the two decades prior to the Civil War and Reconstruction, however, the US incorporated a massive new territory inhabited by a substantial new "minority," which demaned an evolution in the means of subordination, i.e., the racialization of "Mexicans," first as "Greasers" (as in the infamous California anti-vagrancy law of 1855) and later as "cheap labor."

A foundational resource for understanding this history is Tomás Almaguer's Racial Fault Lines: The Historical Origins of White Supremacy in California (1994, new edition forthcoming 2008).  Chapter One, "'We Desire Only a White Population in California' - The Transformation of Mexican California in Historical-Sociological Perspective," is particularly useful.  Another useful resource is Gilbert Paul Carrasco's Latinos in the United States: Invitation and Exile in Juan Perea's Immigrants Out! The New Nativism and the Anti-Immigrant Impulse in the United States (1997).  

A new book that I will likely incorporate into this section of my class is Laura Gómez's  Manifest Destinties: The Making of the Mexican American Race (2008), which provides critical insights into this history beyond the California context.  Understanding "Mexican" racialization in New Mexico is particularly important because that region remained a territory for 62 years -- from 1850 to 1912 -- until the Anglo population outnumbered the Hispano population.  New Mexico is also important en la conciencia xican@ (in Chicana/o consciousness) because the New Mexico Territory was broken into parts to form Arizona, parts of Colorado and eventually New Mexico; it also has great importance as a site of centurial armed resistance to Anglo domination, from Las Gorras Blancas of the late 19th century through the efforts of Reies López Tijerina y La Alianza Federal de Mercedes in the 1960s.)

As Almaguer argues persuasively, using archival historical sources, the racialization of "Mexicans" in the US extended and evolved earlier forms of US racism against Indigenous and African people.  In turn, Carrasco's chapter details how the racialization of "Mexicans" was particularly linked to the evolving labor demands of the 19th and 20th century, e.g., the Gold Rush, agricultural work, World War I, the Great Depression and the so-called "repatriation" campaigns of the 1930s, World War II and the second Bracero Program, "Operation: Wetback" and the H-2 visa program.  (Gómez's arguments complement these by advancing her notion of Mexican Americans being "off-white," meaning sometimes defined as legally white but almost always defined as socially non-white, and grounding her concept in the particular history of New Mexico.)

Here is the take away point for folks open to understanding (and interested in articulating clearly) how racism is at the root of US nativism: Anglos evolved and extended US racism from the history of Indigenous genocide and African slavery as the US conquered and annexed the vast Mexican territory now known as the Southwest.  In so doing, the US force a terrible Faustian pact onto Mexican Americans (and by implication all Latinas/os): deny your Indigenousness, denigrate your Blackness and aspire to racial Whiteness, or be ready for subjugation like an African and slaughter like an Indian.

Geography, region and social space is the critical factor that blinds some of us from seeing the connections between historical and contemporary racism(s) and nativism(s).  Without understanding the foundational historic racialization of "Mexicans" (and the also salient historic racialization of Puerto Ricans) vis-a-vis Anglo American government, citizenship and political economy, it might be confusing to hear me say that US nativism is a form of racism, or and to understand how these ideologies overlap substantially.

However, to one who knows this history, today's nativism--whether it be in Congress, en la frontera or in Long Island--looks like it clearly continues the sorry past.

***

I'll end by citing two more important texts about these ideas.  See Robert S. Chang & Keith Aoki, Centering the Immigrant in the Inter/National Imagination, 85 California Law Review 1395, 10 La Raza Law Journal 309 (1997) (published simultaneously in both journals).  While I have not taught it yet, I read Chang & Aoki's explanation of "nativistic racism" during law school and recall it being rich with insights on this subject.

Second, Juan Perea's, Demography and Distrust: An Essay on American Languages, Cultural Pluralism, and Official English, 77 Minnesota Law Review 269 (1992) is a well structured history of the hidden past of US multilingualism, e.g., French, German, Spanish and English, at the founding and throughout the history of the US and its various states.

Saturday, October 27, 2007

Toward A New Student Insurgency...Second Article

From co-organizer, David Waggoner:

Greetings friends. It has been such a privilege and pleasure to be a part of the organizing of this project, and I want to thank Teague, Marc Tizoc and Anne for including me. We have had many poignant conversations over the last several months, full of laughs, sighs, moments of silence, expressions of exasperation, and moments of lucidity and excitement about the possibilities before us. And now we are inviting you to join us in dialogue, negotiation and collaboration to provoke, practice, play and postulate in the interests of radical, transformative justice.
While we may take comfort in the process of our struggles, and acknowledge the fluidity and radical subjectivity of our lives, we nonetheless are very much about real outcomes, and developing strategies and tactics that will produce tactile, tangible results for our clients, our communities and ourselves. Housing, healthcare and education are not mere platitudes or the slogans to be affixed to a bumper sticker. Access to life’s basic necessities provides the context for experiencing love and pleasure, and it is for these basic rights we struggle. In that vein, from that heart, we seek to come together to create new moments of resistance, metamorphosis, and radical social transformation which have yet to be realized but are within our grasp. We are realizing the intersectionality and multiplicities of identity and hegemony - and how we are often influenced by the dominant modes of power and unwittingly reproduce what we are trying to fight - in ways that are truly opening up completely new opportunities to be in coalition, new opportunities to create fresh critique, and previously unconsidered methods of radical change.
Together, we can draw out from one another the hidden thoughts that will provide the glue to build a thousand thousand experiences of justice that one can taste, hear, touch, smell and feel. There is no reason why we can not provoke in one another – vis-à-vis questions, visions, critique, spontaneous exuberance – more that we ever thought we were capable of to realize exponential well being. We can escape the Socratic method, the desire to control and be controlled, the hegemony of IRAC, the fascism of the four corners of the document and “thinking like a lawyer,” to embrace completely new ways of being human, of being advocates, of using the law to love, of grinding the bones of racism and misogyny to dust. So many briefs remain to be written, arguments to be made, laws to be repealed, judges to be disqualified, communities to be organized, class actions to be certified…
Elvia Arriola is one of many, many people who have begun to show us the way. I hope you will find her remarks as nuanced and enlightening as I did. I look forward to seeing you all soon.
Love and Revolt,
David
RESPIRO LIBRE:1 COMING HOME TO A LATINA LESBIAN SELF: Race and Sexual Orientation in Legal Scholarship
Remarks of Elvia R. Arriola
UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SCHOOL OF LAW
Lesbian and Gay Section of the Association of American Law Schools Meeting
Friday, January 9, 1998, San Francisco, California
Good Afternoon. I feel I have been trying to have this conversation for such a long time. I can't help but feel emotional as I stand before you to have this discussion on race and sexual orientation in legal scholarship. I have been writing about and been involved as a feminist Latina lesbian scholar for so many years. And for so many of those years, as I think back upon the environments or the conditions surrounding my work, I can't help but remember how alone I often felt because of the intersectional nature of my identity, as not only lesbian and feminist but also Latina. I remember for example, when I was writing my very first law review article -- as I was coming out as a lesbian and also budding as a civil rights lawyer in the early eighties in New York City. At times I felt very connected to the gay and lesbian civil rights community I was coming to know personally and professionally through my progressive contacts. For awhile, after my post- graduate fellowship at the ACLU National Headquarters, I volunteered my legal services for Lambda Legal Defense and met wonderful people who helped me feel proud of the fact that I had the courage to come out publicly as a lesbian. But so many other times I felt disconnected completely from these same people; I felt the conspicuousness of my brown skin and Spanish surname when I sat in huge conference rooms as the lone minority among over two dozen other lawyers and activists, deliberating, for example, the litigation strategies for the then upcoming hearing by the Supreme Court in the Bowers v. Hardwick.
To read the complete article, go to:

Monday, October 22, 2007

Toward a New Student Insurgency...First Reading

The first reading in our series is Francisco Valdez's "INSISTING ON CRITICAL THEORY IN LEGAL EDUCATION: MAKING DO WHILE MAKING WAVES".

We hope that after reading the article, you will post your thoughts/reflections/questions to the comments section of this blog posting. The blog is open to POC and our allies.

An excerpt:
"... Since the time that I walked this campus as an undergraduate student, and during these 24 years of your average lifetimes, this nation has become engulfed by a culture war - or, to use Antonin Scalia's quaintly vicious phrase, by a "Kulturkampf" - designed to reinscribe and reinforce inequality normatively and legally. ... These examples illustrate not only the breathtaking success and basic mean-spiritedness of today's culture war, but also grave constitutional failures, for they are paragons of "popular tyranny" - they typify the oppression of the weak by the powerful, which the
adoption of the constitution was supposed to prevent even, or, rather, especially when the name of "democracy' is dragged out to justify majoritarian factionalism and its predictable output: abusive lawmaking; that is, lawmaking that abuses formal control over the State to contrive and arrogate in-group privilege and impose outgroup disorganization, disempowerment and dispossession by legal fiat. ... Thus, it should come as no or little surprise that the law school curriculum resists the integration of critical theory into legal education: imagine if they taught us, as a matter of course
in the first year, what we need to know to pierce through what they currently do teach us, as a matter of course, in the first year. ... These activist efforts, guided by OutCrit and LatCrit theorizing, are designed to produce substantive and institutional social justice change through the practice of theoretical insights, and of the commitments that flow from critical theory and its insights...".

Please find the entire article at:
http://www.law.miami.edu/publications/images/12_la_raza_l_j_137.pdf

In organizing this workshop, our group posed many questions to one another. This article was Marc-Tizoc's response to my questioning the validity of theorizing when discussing communities under siege. What is the function of theory when organizing community? What is the most effective way to connect theory and practice, or praxis?

This article does a very good job of answering some of these questions and leaves me with many more. I hope we can discuss this together online and in DC.

Thank you,

Teague

Monday, October 15, 2007

Toward a New Student Insurgency: Critical Legal Theory and Multidimensional Social Justice

Queridas/os (dear ones):

At the upcoming National Lawyers Guild ("NLG") "Law for the People" convention, to be held in Washington, D.C., Oct. 31 - Nov. 4, 2007, a group of NLG members affiliated with the NLG's The United People of Color Caucus ("TUPOCC") and its Queer Caucus will lead a workshop, Toward a New Student Insurgency: Critical Legal Theory and Multidimensional Social Justice. See generally http://nlg.org/convention/. The workshop will be held on Saturday Nov. 3, during the 1:00-2:15pm workshop time slot. See http://nlg.org/convention/conv_schedule.php.

A description of the workshop follows. In subsequent posts, we will propose texts to read and discuss via this TUPOCC blog, "Legal Activists of Color." We invite people of good will to join us from throughout the NLG community and beyond -- both to read and discuss these texts and to meet in November in Washington, D.C.

Much love,

Marc-Tizoc González

+++++

We
have imagined and designed this workshop to catalyze NLG members’ self-education about critical legal theory’s insights into the multidimensionality of social justice.

By gathering NLG members of diverse backgrounds, identifications and interests, we plan to increase our understanding of the multiple dimensions in which power, oppression and radical possibility exist and operate. Moreover, the workshop will provide the opportunity to organize local reading and discussion groups from physically proximate NLG members, which we will connect into a network via online communication technologies.

By regularly discussing our local sociolegal conditions and multidimensional struggles in relation to texts of critical legal theory, NLG members will cultivate a sense of community based on shared antisubordination principles, community-based lawyering and ethical living practices. In collaborating across the U.S., Guild members can share how we have concretely related critical legal theory to our legal education and legal work and can evolve a multidimensional social justice praxis that transcends older models of lawyering into a new student- and youth-oriented insurgency.

The workshop will feature a discussion of key concepts pertaining to its goals, a brief speech by a TUPOCC co-chair, breakout sessions to form nascent reading-and-discussion groups, and a group discussion about transcending oppressive boundaries and resisting our normative socialization into the legal profession. Prior to the workshop, we will suggest readings and promote initial discussion online via the TUPOCC blog.

Archive