the chicano movement and rodolfo gonzales

7/31/2019 THE CHICANO MOVEMENT AND RODOLFO GONZALES

1/13

THE CHICANO MOVEMENT AND RODOLFO GONZALES

DIANA-ELENA BONCESCU

University of the West Timisoara

Introduction

The second half of the 20th century marked the beginning of numerous

social and political changes in the United States of America. A new world was

emerging out of the shell of tormented times mastered by racial and ethnic

conflicts. The fallacy of the melting pot demonstrated especially through the

increasingly intense fight for civil rights of the Afro-American minority. Less

visible internationally but equally important in terms of demands and impact was

the struggle of the Mexican-American community, determined to assert their

identity whithin the American society. The mid 60s split the movement into the

Mexican-American and the Chicano who became a controversial topic in all

respects due to their alleged radicalization.

The Chicano movement has been a subject of debate for both segments of

the civil society: the minority they emerged from as well as the majority theyaddress. The former criticize it for the adulteration of the Mexican-American

identity and for compromising their efforts to obtain civil rights while the others

consider it to be a considerable threat to the American sovereignty. The aim of

this paper is to establish the role that Rodolfo Gonzales assumed in the Chicano

movement and whether his successful enterprise crossed the bounderies of a

legitimate fight for civil rights, consequently placing the movement onto an

extremist position that condemned the Chicano to marginalization.

In the light of the recent tendency of the international scene to emphasize

the rights of the minorities the discussion over the limit between ethnicity and


2/13

sovereignty is of great importance and relevance. How far a minority can go in

order to assert their identity without endangering the stability of the country to

have adopted them is a sensitive question that needs to be addressed even if it

causes discomfort. At the same time the United States have assumed the role of a

universal model in terms of democratic policies and the manner they decide to

deal with such sensitive matters could and will set a precedent.

My enterprise will start with a brief account of the attempts to define the

Chicano in connection to the different perspectives on the origin of the

movement, step meant to establish the premiss of the evolution of the Chicano

fight. The attention will afterwards focus on the events that took place in the 60s

and the impact Rodolfo Gonzales had in shaping the movement. Finally the Case

Study will analyse the ideas and claims included in thePlan of Aztlan in order to

determine whether the document is a civil rights manifesto or an anti-American

enterprise meant to challange the sovereignty of the United States.

The method I relied on thoughout the study is qualitative data analysis,

which allowed me to identify the elements present inEl Plan de Aztlan thatsubscribe in either category. The interpretation of my findings, encompassed in

the last section, is meant to offer an objective perspective on the matter.

The Chicano identity and the origins of the movement

There is great importance placed on the Chicano identity as the main

source of legitimacy for the movement. This is what clearly distinguishes them

from the Mexican American, thus captivating the public attention. The definition

assumed by the Chicano is connected to the word etymology that is also symbolic

for the birth of a new raza, race, from the ashes of an oppressed nation.


3/13

Most of the scholars agree that the term Chicano originates in the word

Mexicanos that suffered alterations due to its faulty pronounciation (Hartley,

2005:1). An important detail is that at the beginning the term had clear negative

connotations. Thus the Mexican-Americans used it to refer to the newly arrived

immigrants, while the Mexicans resorted to it to designate a low class and poor

moral person (Gamia, 1930:43). From this particular point of view it is accurate

to consider the term Chicano as unifying for a certain category of people who did

dot fit in the society and were equally rejected by the Mexicans as well as by the

Americans. They were people with no identity.

This reality changed with the mid 60s when the word was taken up by a

segment of the Mexican-American civil rights movement and became a source of

ethnic pride as it designated a distinctive raza (Hartley, 2005:2). The new race

assumed a double identity as direct descendants of the native Americans on the

one hand, and of the first Spanish settlers on the other hand. The Indian identity

traced the Chicano origin back to the old Aztec civilization while the Spanish

descendance placed the historical account much later. In this respect thecontroversy exceeds the mere discussion over the double identity assumed by the

Chicano only to transfer onto the territory of the debate concerning the

beginnings of the Chicano resistance movement.

Some scholars tend to push it back in time until Columbus first attempt

to land in the Americas, others believe the movement emerged in 1521 with the

defence of Tenochtitlan, the present New Mexico, against the Spanish invadors

while a part of them argue that we cannot speak about the beginning of the

Chicano movement sooner than the end of the Mexican-American war in 1848,


4/13

war in which Mexico lost a significant part of its north territory to the United

States (Rodriguez, 1996:1).

I consider that the understanding of the beginnings of the Chicano

movement is related to the acceptance of their distinctive identity. In case the

Chicano are agreed upon as a race of Indian-Spanish descendance its resistance

could be regarded as having emerged in 1521 but if we decide to view them as

Mexican-American then it is accurate to state that the movement started at the

end of the Mexican-American war.

However, there is general consensus between the scholars in terms of the

modern Chicano movement brought into the mainstream in the mid 60s with the

significant contribution of Rodolfo Gonzales. The double identity of the Chicano

was intensively capitalized by Gonzales thus becoming a source of power but

also of controversy.

Rodolfo Gonzales and the Chicano movement

A short biography

The nineth child of a family of immigrants from Chihuahua, Gonzaleswas born in Denver, Colorado, on June 18, 1928. Even though the death of his

mother, the Depression, as well as growing up in Eastside Barrio, a tough

neighbourhood, created a lot of obstacles for Gonzales as a child, he had the

sense of identity and the pride of being a Mexican, values instilled in him by his

father. Therefore, Gonzales took his destiny into his own hands and graduated

high school at the age of 16, quite a performance considering he had to work in

the beet fields while studying (Ensslin, 20052).

Gonzales was soon faced with disappointment for the first time when he

had to give up his engineering studies at the University of Denver after only one


5/13

semester due to his impossibility to support the financial cost. As a consequence

he decided to go into professional boxing, which brought Gonzales considerable

success and fame as a winner of a Golden Gloves title and the National Amateur

Athletic Union title. In 1988 he was inducted into the Colorado Sports Hall of

Fame. Still the most important moment was probably the year 1953 when

Gonzales retired from the ring. He now afforded to dream of more and the

Chicano were an important part of his vision (Ensslin, 2005:3).

Owner and manager of a popular eatery and a bail bond company in

Denver, Gonzales decided to fight segregation that remained an every day reality

by political implication. Therefore he joined the Democratic Party within which

he directed the Colorado Viva Kennedy campaign in 1960 (Mariscal, 2005:1). As

a reward, Mayor Tom Currigan appointed him to head theDenver

Neighbourhood Youth Corps in 1965. However, the Democratic Party proved not

to be the answer Gonzales had been hoping for, as the situation did not improve.

After a disagreement with Currigan, Gonzales was fired. Consequently he started

looking elsewhere. Finally Gonzales realized that the so much needed help was tobe found home, therefore the Crusade for Justice was born in mid 60s (Mariscal,

2005:2).

In the late sixties and early seventies, Gonzales organized and supported

high school walkouts, demonstrations against police brutality and legal cases. An

important step taken was the attitude against the war in Vietnam, publicly

asserted in 1966, one year before Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.. Gonzales then

portrayed the America he believed in, a country rather humanitarian than hostile.

There was hostility not only on the front but also at home. To fight the later,

Gonzales led the Southwestern contingent at the Poor Peoples March in


6/13

Washington where he issued hisPlan of the Barrio, addressing housing,

education, barrio-owned businesses and the restitution of pueblo lands and

forming the Congress of Aztlan in order to achieve the goals of the Chicano.

(Ensslin, 2005:3)

Gonzales great ambition was to unite Chicano youth and to create a

continuity of the Hispanic tradition both culturally and politically. The outcome

of his vision was the Annual Chicano Youth Liberation Conference providing the

Chicano youth from all over the United States the opportunity to share their

views. The first conference, held in 1969, marked the birth of a daring idea of

reconfiguration of Aztlan, in other words the decolonization of the Mexican

American. The mythic idea of Aztlan was extended into the Spiritual Plan of

Aztlan orEl Plan de Aztlan (Rodriguez, 1996:4).

ThePlan played a crucial role as it marked the beginning of the Chicano-

Indian alliance, alliance that called for a common, stronger voice more than ever.

The moment arrived at the second Chicano Youth Conference, in 1970, when

Gonzaless vision came one step closer to becoming reality by the formation ofthe Colorado Raza Unida Party. The partys platform addressed critical issues

such as education, economy, justice, immigration and women rights (Wikipedia,

2007).

We have to understand that liberation comes from self determination,

and to start to use the tools of nationalism to win over our barrio brothers, stated

Gonzales in his 1969 speech What Political Road for the ChicanoMilitant?

(Gonzales, 1969). At that time Gonzales was already an icon. His poemI am

Joaquin could be considered a red thread that mobilized the national spirit of the

Chicano.I am Joaquin, written in 1965, was published in all barrio newspapers


7/13

and copies were displayed everywhere as a statement of identity and a tribute to

the Chicano history (Wikipedia, 2007).

Gonzales understood that education could greatly contribute to the self-

determination and identity of the Chicano therefore, Gonzales founded a private

school in 1970, Tlatelolco, which has become a community of scholars, as well

as a gathering place for cultural events (Mariscal, 2005:2).

The assimilation was not a viable option for Gonzales. In his speech

Message to Aztlan, delivered on September 16, 1975, at the Colorado State

Capitol Building, Gonzales, addressing all the people of Aztlan, said: dont be

afraid to lose false friend(Gonzales, 1975). He encouraged people to take

matters into their hands and to seek not mercy but fair political representation. He

believed that the system that has enslaved the minds and the bodies of those

who are confused enough to believe it (Gonzales, 1975) had to be changed and

the most powerful tools in doing that were education and political action.

Different perspectives on the legitimacy and importance of the Chicano

movementThere are two equally important aspects to be taken into account in a

debate whether the Chicano movement had a negative or a positive impact on the

civil rights fight of the Mexican-American. On the one hand, Rodolfo Gonzales

succeded to bring the movement into the mainstream thus drawing the attention

of the American society and of a large part of the minority itself who were for the

first time unified and consequently more powerful. In the same respect the

Chicano movement marked the beginning of the recorded Chicano literature and

film as well as of an alternative educational system (Hartley, 2005:5). Moreover,


8/13

the social, political and economic problems facing this minority were addressed

in an organized and efficient manner.

On the other hand, what seemed to be a viable solution soon became a

reason for conflict. The line between self-determination and nationalism was

suddenly too thin to be clearly distinquished. The violence between the militants

and the authorities escaladed and the movement began to be perceived as an

aggression at the address of the United Sates as a nation. The Chicano did not

simply claim their rights to be respected but they considered themselves the real

owners of the land in the South West of America. Such an attitude is considered a

dangerous example of anti-American feelings in the Hispanic community by

some of the American scholars such as David Montgomery. El Plan de Aztlan is

considered a proof of the intention of the movement to recover Texas, California,

Arizona and New Mexico by immigrating in increasingly large numbers until the

area is to be claimed the region for Mexico (Montgomery, 2002:3).

Case study: El Plan de Aztlan

The document is the foundation of the movement for the eliberation ofAztlan, the ancient territory of the Aztecs assumed as forefathers by the Chicano.

As far as the Spanish heritage is concerned, its claim only reinforces the

legitimacy of the Chicano enterprise. The Plan starts with a clear reference to the

Americans as gringo invadors only to continue with a statement that has often

been used to accuse the Chicano of separatism: we do not recognize capricious

frontiers on the bronze continent. Still there is no clear reference to the

government of the United States.

Another controversial statement the statement included in thePlan

according to which nationalism is the common denominator of the people of


9/13

Aztlan meant to mobilize them. Whether nationalism in the perspective of the

document designates a radical attitude or it simply sends to accepting ones

identity is a matter of choice to be made by the reader. Nationalism is the tool

whileLa Causa is the aim.La Causa refers to gaining control over the

economic, cultural, social and political life of the community.

The use of the word control could be regarded with suspicion, taken the

development of the idea in a later section of the document under the heading

Organizational Goals. There are seven aspects in which the Chicano are called

upon for action in this respect: Unity,Economy, Education, Self-Defence,

Culture and Political Liberation. From the economic point of view the control

refers to taking the land over from the Americans who are regarded are

exploiters. An interesting specification is made concerning the system of

values imposed by the United States that is based on materialism which is to be

replaced with humanism by the Chicano. A second step to be taken is

defending the land with the help of defence units. There is no clear reference

made to who these units consist of or what actions they can perform.The attention given to the Unity,Culture and Education of the Chicano

subscribes in the legitimate civil rights that any minority is entitled to require

from the government of the country they live in. The Chicano claim total

freedom of expression in terms of cultural products as well as an alternative

educational system allowing the young generation to aquire their ethnic values.

As for the Institutions, the claims included in the document apply to any

democracy in general as the main concern of the Chicano is to maintain lucrative

institutions that are representative for the people they serve. In the same respect

the Political Liberation emphasizes yet another legitimate solution for control


10/13

through representation other than by the Republican or the Democrat parties. The

political action is to be taken by a Chicano party.

Regarding the Self-Defence there is one observation that leaves room for

criticism. The idea of reconsidering juvenile delinquency in terms of

revolutionary acts clearly sends to the violent conflicts between the Chicano

youth and the authorities. However, no further explanation is given in the text to

the criteria or the situation in which this reconsideration is justified. This could

seem as encouragement to unlawful acts against the institutional system of the

United States.

The document is concluded by action measures that the Chicano could

take in order to achieve their goals. These measures synthetize the body of the

Plan including the public awareness, nationalism as a tool for self defence,

economic control over the means and products, educational programs designed to

fulfill the needs of the Chicano community, political representation through a

national party of the Chicano, community organization and mobilization and

political autonomy for the Chicano.Conclusions

There are two observations to be made. On the one hand the language of

thePlan is closer to literature than to a political statement. The document

abounds in methaphors that are subject to interpretation. It could be the

interpretation of the Republicans as well as of the Chicano themselves. Either

could use thePlan to justify their actions at a certain moment. On the other hand

thePlan has a very general approach, therefore it lacks necessary specifications

made to clarify the intentionality of certain remarks made about the ownership of


11/13

the land, the political autonomy of the Chicano or the refuse to comply with the

law system in particular cases such as public demonstrations.

The double identity assumed by the Chicano due to Rodolfo Gonzales

militant actions is certainly an argument that empowered the claims contained by

El Plan de Aztlan, however, the factor of unity on any basis does not change the

nature of the document significantly. In my opinion radicalization is not a direct

consequence of the alleged Indian-Spanish heritage but it could as well be an

option for a faction of the Mexican-American resistance. An argument to support

this possibility is the Mexican-American war that caused Mexico a large part of

its land that is still considered by many locals as rightfully Mexican.

The discussion, therefore, evolves around another aspect. The personal,

subjective tone of thePlan offers numerous possibilities to approach the matter.

The fact that the Chicano movement was almost destroyed in the 80s by the

succession of violence between the militants and the authorities stands as an

example for the unfortunate outcome of an enterprise that lacks control and

organization. A mass of people is prone to impulsive actions as long as the meansand aim are not clearly outlined.


12/13

References

El Plan de Aztlan inMecha de Tejaztlan [Online}. Available:

http://studentorgs.utexas.edu/mecha/archive/index-old.html [1998. April

30].

Ensslin, C. 2005. Chicano Movement Was a Turning Point for Denver in

Denver Rocky Mountain News [Online}. Available:

http://www.denver.rmn.com/millenium/0921mile.shtm [2005, April 15].

Gamia, M. 1930.Mexican Immigration to the United States: A Study of Human

Migration and Adjustment. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Gonzales, R. 1969. What Political Road for the Chicano Movement? in

Columbia AmericanHistory [Online}. Available: http://caho-

test.cc.columbia.edu/dbq/11103.html [2005, April 10].

Gonzales, R. 1975. Message to Aztlan in Columbia AmericanHistory [Online}.

Available: http://caho-test.cc.columbia.edu/dbq/11103.html [2005, April

10].

Hartley, G. 2005. Iam Joaquin: Rodolfo Gonzales and the Retroactive

Chicanismo in Corky Gonzales and Retroactive Chicanismo [Online}.

Available: http://epc.buffalo.edu/authors/hartley/pubs/corky.html [2005,

April 15].

Mariscal, J. 2005. The Rising of a Legend in Counterpunch [Online}.

Available: http://counterpunch.org/mariscal04152005.html [2005, April

15].

Montgomery, D. 2002. Mexican Anti-Americanism in America in

Frontpagemag[Online]. Available:


13/13

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=4957

[2002, December 6].

Rodolfo Gonzales in Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia [Online}. Available:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodolfo_Gonz%C%A1lez [2007, May 3].

Rodriguez, R. 1996. The Origins and History of the Chicano Movement in The

History of Chicano Movement[Online}. Available:

http://socrates.berkeley.edu/tochtlu/ChSt168.html [1996, April].

the chicano movement and rodolfo gonzales

Documents