On the Question of Youth and Revolution:
Editor’s Note -This is the second and final part of an article dealing with the question of youth, revolution, and the current contradictions facing MEChA (Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán). The objective of this two-part article is to outline the importance of youth to the national liberation struggle and to point to some negative actions and tendencies found within the Chicano Mexicano Student Movement.
This is done as a way of laying out our some positive/constructive criticism towards making our movement stronger. In the first article we described the importance of young people to revolutionary change, a brief historical development of MEChA, and some of the earlier conflicts found within the Chicano Student Movement. In this second half of the article we provide a narrative of concrete examples of actions and political positions taken by some MEChistas that have been counter productive and negative to the development of the Mexicano national liberation movement. We would like to emphasize that this is not a blanket criticism of all MEChistas, but rather to a small, but influential, fraction that has taken an anti-community stance and has placed student issues above that of the national liberation of the Chicano Mexicano people.
It is also a perspective that comes from an organization whose majority of members were at one time or another leading members of MEChA, and - unlike those who have “retired from the movement” or have “given up struggle” - have continued their activism and commitment to Raza liberation after their student years. Therefore, it is our responsibility as activists and revolutionaries to expose negative tendencies within our movement. Finally, we call on Raza students to study carefully the content of this article in its complete form and make a critical assessment as to where MEChA stands politically and organizationally, and how to unite its activism to that of the national struggle of nuestro pueblo.
CRUSADE FOR JUSTICE WORKS TO REVIVE STUDENT MOVEMENT
Between 1975 and 1981, as was the case with most elements within the movement, there was very little militant struggle coming from the student sector. During that period, only a few organizations actively organized mass-community based militant resistance to gringo colonialism. The most notable of these formations was the Crusade for Justice (based in Denver, Colorado), Committee On Chicano Rights - CCR (based in National City - San Diego, Califas), and until 1979, CASA. These organizations based their politics on progressive-revolutionary nationalism and on the principle of self-determination for La Raza. One of the few student voices that upheld revolutionary politics and worked with community organizations was the U.C.S.D. Chicano student collective that published (and continues to publish) the newspaper Voz Fronteriza.
In 1979, in an effort to revive Chicano student unity and action at the nationwide level, the Crusade for Justice organized the first “National Chicano Student Conference.” The conference was held at Denver Metro State University of Colorado and was co-hosted by Metro State MEChA. Keynote speakers at this conference included Rodolfo “Corky” Gonzalez (chairman, Crusade for Justice), Rudy Acuña (professor at CSUN and author of Occupied America), Ernesto Vigil (Vice chair, Crusade for Justice), and Herman Baca (chairman, CCR). A large contingent of members of the CCR, many who later became founders of Unión del Barrio (in 1981), participated in this historic conference.
Between 1979 and 1992, 13 National Chicano Student Conferences were held throughout Aztlán. But as explained in the first segment of this article, the student conferences soon became heavily influenced by non-Raza multinational formations, such as the LRS (Liga or League of Revolutionary Struggle), CWP (Communist Workers Party), SWP (Socialist Workers Party), and the rest of what was known in the movement as “alphabet soup” organizations. Moreover, many MEChA chapters became isolated from the community. It was not until 1989, motivated by the activism of the NCMC (and other revolutionary forces), that we began to see the resurgence of nationalist/pro-liberation politics coming from MEChA and other student formations. Fearing a militant-nationalist Chicano Mexicano student movement, the Hispanic Democratic liberal-types began to actively oppose this political development.
THE NATIONAL CHICANO MORATORIUM SERVES AS A SPARK FOR PROGRESSIVE-REVOLUTIONARY NATIONALIST POLITICS
In December of 1989, as a response to the call from Unión del Barrio and La Raza Unida Party, the National Chicano Moratorium Committee (NCMC) was reestablished. The original NCMC had organized the “August 29,1970 Chicano Moratorium March” against the war in Vietnam and for Raza self-determination. In an attempt to keep Raza from exercising our democratic rights, the Los Angeles chota viciously attacked the marchers, leaving three dead, dozens injured, and hundreds arrested. Since then, “August 29th, 1970” has become a symbol of nuestra Raza’s struggle for self-determination.
The primary objectives for the reestablished of the NCMC were:
(1) To organized a truly national “20th Commemoration” of the historic East Los Angeles “August 29th March.”
Those in attendance agreed to the objectives as presented by the junta facilitators, Carlos Pelayo (La Raza Unida Party) and Ernesto Bustillos (Unión del Barrio). The junta participants developed points of unity, agreed upon through the democratic process as the method for making decisions, voting was done by region (one vote per region) and a national structure (mesa directiva) was formed.
Within months of the December junta, the NCMC became the largest mass-base coalition in Aztlán. It included most sectors of our community: students, workers, community activists, mujer groups, educators, and other forces. Its activism became a spark for progressive-nationalist activism throughout Aztlán. Terms such as “Chicano Power,” “Liberation,” “Revolution,” “Chicano Nationalism,” advanced by the NCMC, once again became popular with students, rap groups, and barrio youth. Organizations such as Crusade For Justice, Brown Berets de Aztlán, MEChA, Four Directions, Unión del Barrio, Movimiento de Liberación Nacional, La Raza Unida Party, and other formations became part of the NCMC. Regions were encouraged to be formed and open to anyone one who agreed to the principles of unity and the structure of the NCMC. Regions were formed in San Diego, Ventura, Orange County, San Francisco Bay Area, Santa Barbara, El Paso, Denver, Phoenix, San Fernando Valley, Riverside, Los Angeles, and Fresno.
ROOTS OF THE CONTRADICTIONS BETWEEN MEChA AND NCMC: REFORMISM AND INFANTILISM FIND SPACE IN THE CHICANO STUDENT MOVEMENT
The 1990 “20th Commemoration” was a great success. Not only was the NCMC able to unite 12 different regions and rally over 6,000 Raza to march in commemoration of one of the most militant days in Raza history, it was also able to establish a permanent nationwide network of groups committed to building a strong national Chicano Mexicano organization. (Read, “6,000 Chicano Mexicanos And Supporters March Down The Streets Of East Los Angeles”, ¡La Verdad!, August 1990 - January 1991.)
Immediately after the 20th Commemoration, we witnessed the development of three basic lines of political thought and practice within the NCMC:
° One line of thought advanced the idea that NCMC should become a loose, liberal, coalition, with little accountability to the national structure and leadership. It was a line that basically promoted “movement politics as usual.” It proposed working with Democratic party politicians, social service agencies, etc. At best, this line could be considered “reformist” - working within the system, not to destroy it. Key elements supporting this line were long time activists Carlos Montes and Arnulfo Casillas. Also to be found pushing this line were those organizations who feared organizational competition from the NCMC.
By the end of 1990, those who had pushed the first two lines mentioned above began to leave the NCMC. With one exception (that of the San Francisco Bay Area Region), none of those who left the NCMC formally explained the reasons for their departure.
Then, in the summer of 1991, a faction within the L.A. region, under the leadership of Carlos Montes, demanded that they be recognized as a separate “East L.A.” region. They charged that the existing Los Angeles region was controlled by “sexists” and “quasi-military types,” who disregarded the opinions of women and student members of the region. They petitioned the NCMC at a meeting held at Santa Ana Community College and threatened to leave the NCMC and form their own organization if the NCMC did not recognize them as a separate “East L.A.” region.
After much discussion and hearing all sides of the issue, the NCMC with the majority of the regions present, voted not to recognize the division of the Los Angeles region. The NCMC felt this would promote divisiveness versus unity within each particular region and suggested that all forces within the L.A. region get together and struggle out their differences. In response, the “East L.A. faction,” threw a tantrum and stormed out of the meeting (along with some MEChistas from ELAC), calling some members of the L.A. region “chauvinist pigs.” It is important to note that the majority of the women NCMC members present opposed the division of Los Angeles Region and the stance of the Montes - led faction (this group later formed a liberal-reformist organization called “PODER,” which petered-out after about 12 months of existence). It is around this particular incident that we find the roots of the current anti-NCMC attitude among some MEChA students.
MOCOSO POLITICS WITHIN THE RANKS OF THE STUDENT MOVEMENT
Within weeks of this incident, four to five students from East L.A. College and former members of the NCMC youth committee, who were associated with the “East L.A. faction,” began a anti-NCMC and anti-Unión del Barrio campaign of slander and rumor mongering. They charged the NCMC of being sexist and disrespectful of student concerns. We even heard that part of the slander included charges that the Unión was “pushing drugs.” In response to these lies and counter-revolutionary attacks, the Unión printed a special article from which we quote:
“Those levying the accusations against the NCMC have put across their concerns in a fashion which represents the most negative, slanderous, disruptive, and infantile style of struggle. Most of the information being spread by these elements have come about through gossip at parties, hotel rooms, hallways, lobbies, restrooms, backyards, etc. Never have they cited specific examples or details to substantiate there accusations - all is put forth as ‘hearsay’ or generalizations.
“We have reports from MEChistas who have heard these elements say things such as ‘fuck the elders and movement veterans,’ ‘we’re are on our own,’ ‘we don’t want to work with anybody but MEChA,’ ‘we don’t trust her or him, they are Liga members,’ ‘we must boycott the 1992 marcha in San Diego,’ ‘the Chicano Press Association is being manipulated by Unión del Barrio,’ and so forth. Yet, while they slandered and bad mouthed the NCMC, these individuals hypocritically continued to request assistance from the NCMC membership. When questioned about their negative activities they denied they were opposed in any way with the NCMC. This two-faced, chisme-spreading style of work can only be of service to the government and other enemies of our people.” (Read, “NCMC Responds To Mocoso Politics And Police-Style Attacks!, ¡LA VERDAD!, August 1991 - Jan. 1992).
We wrote more on this particular subject in another issue of ¡LA VERDAD! :
“It was also within one year of the 20th commemoration [of August 29th Chicano Moratorium] that we witnessed an isolationist ‘student only’ politic coming from some MEChAs in Califas. Based mostly in the Los Angeles area, some student elements specifically called on MEChAs to boycott NCMC events. They accused the NCMC as being ‘sexist’ (when women have always held leadership positions in the NCMC), didn’t take MEChA into account, or claimed that Unión del Barrio was controlling the NCMC (even though Voz Fronteriza, La Raza Unida Party, Brown Berets de Aztlán, El Congreso de La Comunidad, several MEChAs and dozens of other groups were part of the NCMC). Anyone actively participating in the NCMC knew that these accusations were unfounded and we repeatedly requested that those spreading the rumors and attacks against the NCMC meet with us - they refused.” (Read “15 Years of Struggle for the National Liberation of the Mexicano People,” Part VI, ¡LA VERDAD!, Jan-May, 1997)
POLITICAL PSYCHOPATHS
Leading this slander campaign within the student movement were ELAC MEChistas Ernesto Guillen, Gina Aparicio, Mike Casarez (which was later expelled from MEChA), and Sofia Quiñones. Never did they publicly challenge our criticism or did any sort of self-criticism. In order to put a close to this episode and move on with the business of fighting for the self-determination of nuestra Raza, several members of the NCMC (who were invited to attend by the SDSU MEChA) publicly laid out a challenge at the Southern California MEChA Regional meeting. Held on January 25, 1992, at San Diego State University, and with over 25 MEChA chapters represented, speaking on behalf of the NCMC, Irma Esparza and Juan Parrino confronted those in attendance who had been slandering the NCMC and the Unión to raise any questions, criticism, or concerns they might have of the NCMC. As is the case with most rumor-spreaders, they said not a single word. Later, we were able to sum-up the politics of this motley crew as “psychopath politics” as was demonstrated with an unnatural fetish for rumors, scandals, and emotional outbursts; most left the movement and others were expelled from MEChA.
Nevertheless, these counter revolutionary forces, picking allies along the way (some who had no idea who or what the NCMC was), continued their slanderous ways. Joining them (though not in an organized conspiracy fashion), were the liberal - hispanics, petty - bourgeois gay-lesbianism advocates, armchair radicals, some college professors, poverty pimps, vendido-types, and a host of other opportunists who had a vested interest in destroying a militant Chicano Mexicano revolutionary national liberation movement. This potpourri of opportunists began around 1992, to put a halt on the resurgence of the progressive nationalist student movement and to neutralize the effectiveness of the NCMC.
DEMOCRATIC PARTY POLITICS, ANTHROPOLOGICAL CULTURALISM, AND REACTIONARY GAY-LESBIANISM PLANT ROOTS AT MEChA CONFERENCES
At a National Chicano Student Conference, held on April 10-12, 1992 at Albuquerque, Nuevo México, spreading the rumor that NCMC were “Communist Liga” members and were trying to “infiltrate” MEChA, the psychopaths lobbied (unsuccessfully) to keep the NCMC from participating in workshops. NCMC was told by El Paso MEChistas that some ELAC MEChistas were threatening to disrupt any workshop where NCMC members were panelists.
VENDIDOS AND MOCOSOS UNITE TO BOYCOTT NCMC EVENTS
In 1992 the NCMC was in the process of organizing a 500 Years Of Raza Resistance Marcha; which was to opposed the celebration of “Columbus” and the 500 years of genocide, slavery, and colonialism that the imperialist-capitalist gabacho power nations (U.S. and Europe) were promoting. The anti-revolutionary forces found within some MEChA in the L.A. area, continued to slander the NCMC and actively waged a campaign to keep MEChA chapters from participating in the marcha. They said that the march was not going to happen, that there was going to be violence, etc. Even though they knew that the NCMC marcha was the only national Chicano Mexicano event, these elements still opposed the marcha. In addition, they proposed at national and state-wide MEChA meetings that MEChA support an event to be held in San Francisco. It was to be organized by a conglomerate, made-up of liberal Democratic Party-Rainbow, multi-national and gay-lesbian forces and was scheduled to take place at the same time that the NCMC was organizing the “500 Years of Raza Resistance March” in San Diego-San Ysidro. Summing-up this contradictory stance we wrote:
“Why are these elements calling for a boycott of the ‘1992 Marcha?’ Is it because the Chicano Mexicano children, women, and workers who are daily brutalized, raped, and killed by the Migra - are not ‘MEChA members?’ Why are these individuals, who profess to want to liberate Aztlán, opposed to going down to ‘a war zone’ where atrocities are being committed daily against our people? Why are these individuals, who ‘bravely’ claim to be committed to the self-determination of La Raza, proposing that MEChA boycott the Chicano Mexicano ‘1992 Marcha’ in San Diego, and instead attend some San Francisco event where they will be ‘safe’ from the police/Migra who are daily brutalizing La Raza? We further ask, what are these individuals concretely doing to oppose Migra and Police terror?... [T]o organize and unite barrio youth?.... [O]r to better the education for all Raza?
“What we do see these individuals doing is creating disunity within the student movement and attempting to destroy the work of the Chicano Mexicano political organizations.” (See “NCMC Responds To Mocoso Politics And Police-Style Attacks!, ¡LA VERDAD!, August 1991 - Jan. 1992)
In spite of the “boycott” of the Marcha de Resistencia by some elements within MEChA, the event was a success. Over one third of the participants were MEChistas, many of them traveling all the way from Oregon, Washington, Arizona, and Texas. Hypocritically, the same elements who were actively working against the Marcha, making no effort whatsoever to help build this event, showed-up with their banners and acted like they were not aware of their own actions.
THE STRUGGLE AROUND CHICANO STUDIES AT UCLA -WHERE WAS MECHA?
On June 8, 1993, nine Raza (8 young people and a professor) ended a 14 day hunger strike, demanding a full Chicano Studies Department at UCLA. The significance of this particular event- to the subject of this article- was the almost total absence of participation of MEChA in the hunger strike. We understood UCLA MEChA’s absence was due to the mocoso politics that were influencing their activity (inactivity is more like it) on campus. In an article in Voz Fronteriza, this question was summed-up in the following way:
“[We found] that the student movement in general was caught off guard by the turn of events and did not play a leading role in a struggle that was right on campus. The issue (of a militant struggle) coming down was never seriously discussed at the National MEChA Conference held at Fullerton [Califas] in April [of 1993] or the Statewide MEChA conference held at Stanford in May. In fact, not one striker was a UCLA MEChista and we do not find one word about this struggle in the UCLA [Chicano] campus publication La Gente April-May 1993 issue. Certainly, some elitist elements within MEChA, mostly in the L.A. area, were so busy talking and gossiping (at conferences, in hallways, etc.) about the ‘independence of youth’ and the student movement from ‘outside’ ‘veterano’ organizations that they forgot about their backyard and literally got chumped! Their inability to engage in self-criticism has led some to take part in infantile, chisme, unprincipled attacks against professors Juan Quiñones and Rudy Acuña.
“When the strike was over and the UCLA administration gave in to some of the demands of the strikers, an “internal struggle” came down as to how these concessions where to be used (who would teach the classes, what will be the name of the program, who will administer the Chicano Studies Center, and so forth). Again, due to the influence of a small group of students who were against working with community groups, UCLA MEChA failed to provide leadership or even play a minor role on a campus struggle that was centered on the objectives of El Plan de Santa Barbara: the founding document of MEChA. (See article “Chicano Studies, the UCLA Hunger Strike, and the Struggle For Chicano Mexicano Self-determination”, Voz Fronteriza, June 1993)
PROP 187: AN OPPORTUNITY TO REALLY REACH OUT TO THE MASSES OF OUR PUEBLO -AT A CRITICAL PERIOD IN HISTORY- WAS LOST
In November of 1994, one of the most racist anti-Mexicano laws was approved by California voters. It was a law designed to keep educational, social, and medical services from Mexicanos who, according to gringo mentality, are “illegally” in the United States (we know that the only illegal aliens are the racist white settlers who stole this land, killing millions of Indigenous people, and enslaving millions of Africans). It was the stance of the progressive-revolutionary forces that the solution to the current anti-Mexicano legislation and scapegoating was mass militant actions united under a strong organization committed to the total liberation of the Mexicano people.
For months, a truly revolutionary situation was developing. Literally hundreds of thousands of young people were becoming radicalize by this overt attack on the Mexicano people. Thousands upon thousands, mainly Jr. High and High school students throughout Califas, most from barrio-working class backgrounds, walked out of schools, marched and held militant rallies. Carrying Mexican flags, calling for unified action and defiance of the system, and chanting anti-gringo slogans, it was clear to the youth that Prop 187 was an attack on the Mexicano community. (Read, “What Proposition 187 Represents, What The Vendidos Are Doing, What We Must Do.”, ¡LA VERDAD!, Oct.-Dec. 1994).
The response from the progressive forces demonstrated our weakness as we were not able to provide effective leadership and carry the struggle being waged by the masses to a level that would bring us closer to national liberation. The vendidos and liberals (state officials, city council people, principals, college administrators, etc.), in an orgy of opportunism, were able to confuse and pacify the masses by telling our juventud to end the school walk-outs, not to hold any militant rallies, and to “tone” down their Mexicanidad (nationalism); they demanded that Mexican flags not be displayed. They proposed a struggle that would not “alienate” gabachos and to work within the system (voting, etc.); it was a stance that defied the realities of history and our present conditions. It was a stance that negated the fact that historically voting has never helped an oppressed people and that only militant actions have brought about positive change. Unfortunately, most of the MEChA leadership, especially in the L.A. and San Diego areas, were won over to the stance of the vendidos and liberal opportunists. Prop. 187 passed and the opportunity to really reach out to the masses of our pueblo, at a critical period in history, was lost.
One of the few responses to Prop 187 that attempted to tie the fight against 187 to the struggle for self-determination of La Raza, was the Nov. 3, 1994 march organized by the Raza Rights Coalition- NCMC. The march, attended by close to 400 people, went through the city of San Ysidro and to the so-called “border.” The thousands of Raza who saw the demonstration supported its demands - which called for the end of anti-Mexicano scapegoating by racist politicians and the self-determination and liberation of all Mexicanos. Only a handful of MEChistas were present; under the advice of some elements within MEChA Central, most decided to stay home and do nothing to defend La Raza, rather than support something that was organized by the NCMC; a political stand that places student politics (or “autonomy”) above that of the liberation of a whole people.
EL DIA DE RESISTANCIA DE LA RAZA
The MEChA “boycott” of progressive-revolutionary community organizations was again to take place during the 25th Commemoration of the August 29th Chicano Moratorium (which was held on Aug. 26, 1995). The commemoration, with the theme of “Día Nacional de Resistance de La Raza,” called for the unity of Raza and for winning people over to actively resisting all forms of oppression in which our gente suffer.
For over a year the NCMC had done outreach to dozens of organizations and had conducted community/barrio leaf-letting in areas where the NCMC had regions. Special efforts were made to get state-wide and nationwide MEChA support of this event. The leadership of MEChA, again centered around the San Diego and Los Angeles Centrales, refused to support the event.
Disappointed, but not demoralized by the lack of MEChA support, the NCMC continued to work hard to make the 25th commemoration a success. Dozens of organizations endorsed the event, including La Raza Unida Party, Brown Berets de Aztlán, Crusade for Justice, All African Revolutionary Party, Unión del Barrio, United Farm Workers Union, African People’s Socialist Party, Voz Fronteriza and many more organizations. It is important to note, that some MEChA’s, including San Diego City College and Bowie High school (El Paso), independently from those calling for a boycott, supported the marcha.
As the date of the march neared (about 2 weeks before the march was to take place), the NCMC was approached by a member of the L.A. MEChA Central. Saul Figueroa (Cal State Dominguez Hills) asked the NCMC to allow a representative of the L.A. Central to speak at the march rally. He explained that if the NCMC agreed to the request, this gesture would serve as the beginning of a reconciliatory process that would put an end to contradictions that existed between L.A. Central and the NCMC. Even though L.A. MEChA Central had done nothing to help build for the 25th commemoration, for the sake of unity, the NCMC agreed to providing space in the program to L.A. Central. Later we were to learn that Saul Figueroa was one of the main elements speaking against the NCMC and had no authority from L.A. Central to speak on their behalf. L.A. Central members saw Figueroa speak at the 20th Commemoration and heard about his dialogue with the NCMC -yet never did anything to address this type of political opportunism found within their ranks.
Yet, despite the opposition from of some elements of within MEChA, the 25th commemoration was a success. It was able to draw over three thousand people: homeboys and homegirls, students, workers, cultural groups, movement organizations, and activists from throughout Aztlán. But once the 25th commemoration was over, L.A. MEChA Central, completely discounted NCMC’s efforts to resolve contradictions and never again attempted to work with the NCMC and continued to push the boycott of the NCMC at the regional, state, and national levels.
CONVOLUTED THINKING ON THE PART OF SOME OF MECHAS LEADERSHIP
In 1996, we again saw certain elements within the leadership of MEChA working in opposition to the NCMC; this time it was to boycott the marcha and conference that the NCMC was organizing in opposition to the racist Republican Party National- GOP Convention which was to be held on Aug. 12, 1996 in San Diego, Califas. The Raza Rights Coalition (NCMC- San Diego) had begun in late 1994 to organize a campaign against the Republican Party Convention, which was to end with a National Raza Unity Conference of our own and host a massive anti-Republican Party marcha.
An “adhoc” committee was formed to the work around the anti-GOP campaign. MEChA members from San Diego Mesa College were part of the initial meetings and Cesar Fernandez (Mesa College MEChA) volunteered for the task of bringing more MEChA chapters into the organizing of the anti-GOP events. Not only did Fernandez fail to follow-up on the work he had committed himself to doing, but without explanation he stopped attending the committee meetings. Dozens of phone calls were made to Fernandez to inquire about the status of MEChA as to their role around the GOP struggle. After a couple months, he finally called back mumbling something about how busy he was and that he couldn’t find the time to participate in the organizing of the campaign.
Cesar Fernandez, who later transferred to San Diego State University, was to surface a few months later as a key player in something called “The Coalition for Social and Economic Justice” (CSEJ), a group which included petty bourgeois white women from the National Organization for Women (NOW), Glinton-Gore Campaigners, gay-lesbian organizations, Gus Chavez (who opposes the liberation of the Mexicano nation), Brown Berets National Organization (David Sanchez and Geronimo Blanco who used the gringo colonial courts to sue the Brown Berets de Aztlán), and Hispanic groupings. Fernandez and Eddie Torres (both from San Diego State) were instrumental in getting both the California State-Wide and National MEChA conferences to oppose the RRC-NCMC marcha and support the CSEJ’s march against the GOP. In fact these elements were responsible for individual MEChA campuses pulling their endorsement from the NCMC event, i.e UCSD MEChA. (see “We Must Stop Turning To Hispanic Vendidos and White Liberals for Leadership- Let There Be No Confusion,” April-August 1996 ¡LA VERDAD!). This action supporting the CSEJ represents some heavy convoluted thinking on the part of some of MEChA’s leadership, who opposed working with Unión del Barrio, the Brown Berets de Aztlán, and the NCMC on the grounds that this compromised “MEChA’s autonomy,” and yet had no problem uniting with the Democratic Party, NOW, white Gay-Lesbian groups, and Hispanic vendidos.
Again, despite the lack of support from MEChA at the state and nationwide level and the “boycott” from some of its infantile leadership, the Raza Unity Conference and Marcha Against The GOP-Convention were successful. Over 20 organizations participated, including MEChA’s from throughout Califas and Arizona. This represented- as we have explained previously- that the rank and file of MEChistas are committed to working with community based organizations and for the self-determination of all Raza, while a small, but influential clique, are opposed to the principles of Raza self-determination.
In response to a critique of the CSEJ and anti-community line found within MEChA, published in the April-August 1996 issue of ¡LA VERDAD!, Cesar Fernandez- on behalf of San Diego State University MEChA, attempted to push a position paper which called for all San Diego area MEChAs to not work with the Raza Rights Coalition. The following is an excerpt from this position paper:
“[MEChA] will no longer recognize or work with, in part or whole, the organization known as the Raza Rights Coalition which is the San Diego chapter of the National Chicano Moratorium Committee. From this it should be understood that while [we] cannot dictate limits on general membership, individuals who work with the RRC/NCMC cannot be officers in MEChA at any level. Also, it should be understood that RRC/NCMC events can no longer be announced at MEChA events or meetings.” (MEChA Central de San Diego: Position Paper - 20 Sept. 1996, written by Cesar Fernandez).
The paper - while initially accepted by S.D. Central, due to misinformation - was later overturned by San Diego Central - after some honest MEChistas. Unión del Barrio members also openly struggled with these negative elements (for more on this issue contact La Verdad Publications). Yet the people pushing this position paper did not provide an answer to the central points of Unión’s critique:
(1) Who really organized the “marcha against prop 209,” was it MEChA or the CSEJ?
NEGATIVE ELEMENTS REFUSE TO RESOLVE CONTRADICTIONS
The position paper never denied that MEChA was being lied to and used by the Hispanic vendidos, it emphasized the “autonomy of MEChA” versus unity among movement forces. It never identifies one political view upheld by the NCMC generally - Unión del Barrio in particular - that is in contradiction to MEChA’s philosophical views (El Plan de Santa Barbara and El Plan Espiritual de Aztlán), and incorrectly referred to ¡LA VERDAD! as a publication of the RRC/NCMC, when it fact it is the political organ of Unión del Barrio. For all intents and purpose, it was a dishonest, unprincipled, personal position written by someone who has a problem (which he fails to identify) with the Unión versus a political document that attempts to resolve differences between movement organizations.
Furthermore, in an effort to gain support for his infantile, anti-Unión del Barrio, anti-revolutionary stance, Cesar Fernandez and others in San Diego Central orchestrated a “MEChA meeting” in which 10 to 15 “former” activists, most of them vendido types, mouth-off a bunch of lies and accusations about the political stance and history of the Raza Rights Coalition and Unión del Barrio. In response to the position paper and meeting, the RRC wrote the following letter to San Diego MEChA Central:
“In regards to the ‘Central Position Paper,’ we found it to be riddled with errors, lies, and half-truths. The position paper was not only full of errors [especially regarding the real organizers of the Sacramento march, MEChA, and the Coalition For Social and Economic Justice (CSEJ)], but it went against the most fundamental principles of MEChA (El Plan de Santa Barbara) and the Movimiento for Raza self-determination (the political struggles of La Raza Unida Party, Brown Berets, National Chicano Moratorium Committee, Movimiento de Liberación Nacional, Unión del Barrio, and other liberation organizations).
“In regards to the junta held at USD [University of San Diego] on Sept. 30, we found it organizationally inappropriate (undemocratic) and opportunist - since it provided only the view of the authors on the ‘Position Paper.’ The leadership of Central basically saw it fit to call for a meeting which provided a forum for anti-Raza Rights Coalition (RRC) speakers - yet did not invite anyone from the RRC to express our position. In fact, Central leadership misled us to believe that the junta was for ‘MEChistas only,’ yet invited a host of ‘non-MEChistas’ (most who are not active in the Chicano Mexicano struggle for self-determination) to criticize the RRC.
“We therefore respectfully propose, a ‘public debate’ with those within MEChA central, and those who criticized us at the USD junta. We feel that this would be a more principled path towards resolving any differences that might exist within our organizations.
“Compañeros y Compañeras de MEChA Central, we are sure that you understand the urgency of this matter and our honest effort to resolve it; therefore we would appreciate a timely response to our concerns. If we do not hear from you soon, we can only conclude that the leadership of Central wishes to drop the issues or has no intention of resolving the contradictions which currently exist.” (letter to MEChA Central from the Raza Rights Coalition, signed by Consuelo Manriquez, Coordinator of the RRC, Oct. 4,1996).
Central never responded to this letter. Yet we were to see Cesar Fernandez leading the slander and attacks against the Brown Berets de Aztlán throughout 1997 and into 1998; specifically after the National MEChA Conference held at Michigan State University in 1997.
ELEMENTS WITHIN FULLERTON MECHA CALL POLICE ON COMMUNITY ACTIVISTS
The vendidos moved quickly to utilize the confusion leading to the National MEChA Conference and attempted to isolate the Brown Berets de Aztlán and other community organizations -who in one way or another were associated with the NCMC or adhere to revolutionary nationalist politics. This reactionary movida took on solid roots in the politics coming from Fullerton MEChA and the Southern Califas MEChA regional. This reactionary position reached a fever pitch when Fullerton MEChA actually called the University Administration and Police to arrest members of the Chicano Studies Student Association and the Brown Berets de Aztlán, claiming that they were being physically threatened.
In a ten-page document sent to the Vice-President of Student Affairs, MEChA Fullerton State claimed that they did not feel safe on or off campus and that they feared for their lives, and they provided the university administration a list of 11 people (all except one, students at Fullerton) who they felt were threatening them. Furthermore they listed “24 incidents” which MEChA-Fullerton claimed were acts of violence or intimidation (read “Written complaint by M.E.Ch.A. to Dr. Buck, Feb. 26, 1997). Needless to say, it doesn’t take a college education to see that the charges were baseless and childish and were no reason to go to the University Administration or the police.
The fact that the University or Police did nothing about the complaint proves the point. But the question remains, who was behind this attempt to create disunity within MEChA at Fullerton State? We can only conclude (until they come out of the closet) that it is the Hispanic vendido types who fear the politics of liberation as it will challenged and expose the role they play within the oppression of nuestra Raza.
MECHA SPLIT AT MICHIGAN STATE WAS BASED ON HISPANIC, INFANTILE, ANTI-MEXICANO LIBERATION POLITICS
On April of 1997, a major split occurred at the National MEChA Conference held at the University of Michigan at Lansing. Claiming that MEChA at the University of Michigan had violated the rules by allowing the participation of non-MEChAs at the conference, dozens of MEChAs, mostly from Califas called the conference illegal and held their own conference, where they voted to expel University of Michigan MEChA from the national MEChA network.
The problems began when some MEChistas - from Califas - disrupted a workshop which “they did not approve of” and because they wanted to bring up questions regarding “MEChAs national structure.” Upset by the disrespect and rudeness that the MEChistas were showing (through their noisy disruption of the workshop) towards the speaker and as well to the hosting MEChA chapter, some Brown Berets de Aztlán told disrupters to be quiet and to be more considerate of others. This led to a shouting match between the MEChistas (mostly from Califas) on one side and the Brown Berets de Aztlán and MEChA Michigan State on the other. After the disrupters left the workshop, some of them immediately began to spread rumors claiming that the Brown Berets de Aztlán had threaten them with weapons. No matter what the hosting MEChA did to bring clarity to the confusion caused by the rumors, including guaranteeing the safety of all participants, the rumors continued. This effectively destroyed any possibility of anything positive coming from the conference.
While the MEChistas from Califas (and their supporters) claimed that the split was caused by Michigan MEChA’s failure to follow National MEChA rules, the underlining cause of the divisiveness was due to the fact that Michigan MEChA had invited the participation of the NCMC and Brown Berets de Aztlán. Their inability to be up front as to the real motives behind their movidas, led them to hold their own conference and expel MEChA Michigan State (the hosting MEChA!) from the nationwide network. This demonstrates an underhanded and opportunist approach to struggle by some southern California MEChA chapters as they continuously and in an unprincipled fashion used bureaucracy, Robert Rules of order, and the emotionalism of “MEChA’s autonomy” to hide their Hispanic politics and opposition to the national liberation politics of the NCMC and Brown Berets de Aztlán.
A particularly reactionary and counter-revolutionary product that came out of the Michigan conference was the attempt by the vendidos associated with David Sanchez and Geronimo Blanco, to defame long time activists Seferino Garcia and David Rico of the Brown Berets de Aztlán. This sect of vendidos, utilizing the internet, especially the Nation of Aztlán Discussion Forum Web page, referring to the chismes that were created at Michigan, called Seferino Garcia and David Rico (who were guest of MEChA Michigan at the conference) thugs, infiltrators, and police agents. Some irresponsible elements repeated this charge without making any effort what so ever to verify what actually happen at the Michigan conference or to find information regarding the years of commitment to Raza liberation by camaradas Seferino Garcia and David Rico. (Read, “Neo-colonial Hispanics Are Attacking Movement Forces In An Attempt To Confuse La Raza And To Destroy The National Liberation Struggle”, ¡LA VERDAD!, Jan.-May 1997).
UCLA MECHA UPHOLDS RACIST MAYOR OF LOS ANGELES
A particularly disturbing example of Hispanic politics within MEChA, was the content and character of the most recent National MEChA conference held at UCLA form April 13 to April 17, 1998. Hosted by UCLA, the conference consisted of anthropological sessions, gay-lesbian workshops, and college survival courses. While almost totally absent of any community or national liberation politics, the conference program (brochure) had a whole section devoted to Hispanics and right-wing politicians. The section entitled “Welcome from the community”, included full-page ads, with portraits, of politicians (assembly people, city council members, etc.) welcoming the MEChistas to UCLA.
The most disgusting was the welcoming by the racist Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan (racist millionaire) who is one of the key supporters of Prop. 227 (the anti-bilingual education initiative). Riordan’s welcome to MEChistas is equivalent to that of Hitler greeting Jews; it has no room in the program of any organization who claims to be part of the Chicano Mexicano movement. It was just as disgusting to learn that not one MEChA chapter challenged the conference organizers for placing Riordan’s statement and photo in the conference program.
Furthermore, conference principal of unity #7, as listed in the program, explains that national flags (which refers to Mexican flags) will not be permitted and anyone violating this rule was to be kicked-out of the conference. So while UCLA MEChA saw fit to exclude Unión del Barrio, the NCMC, and the Brown Berets de Aztlán, they saw nothing wrong with upholding the Hispanic politicos and the racist Mayor of Los Angeles.
VOZ FRONTERIZA IS A SHINING EXAMPLE OF STUDENT ACTIVISM
As we explained earlier in this article, Voz Fronteriza has been one of the few student groups that has consistently upheld community politics and has a long history of working with non-campus organizations. We refer to Voz in this article because it provides a shinning example of what student politics is capable of and what it must do if it is to be considered part of the Chicano Mexicano Movement.
Founded in the fall of 1975, Voz Fronteriza has been the longest running Raza student newspaper and the most consistent student publication in the history of our movement. Which to us raises a particular question that all activists must understand. The question is: why has Voz Fronteriza existed for so long; been consistent in publication; and has been the most progressive, militant voice in Chicano Mexicano student history? Why is it that UCLA, Cal State University Northridge, Cal State L.A., USC, UC Berkeley, San Diego State, and other Universities have never been able to produce the political quality and consistency of Voz Fronteriza? Some of these Universities don’t even have a publication!
“From its inception, the staff of Voz Fronteriza agreed that Voz was to be tied to the community. That it would serve the community. That it would report the truth and deal with issues that were real and dear to the Mexican community. That it would make its resources available to the community. In essence, that it would try to implement the ‘Plan de Santa Barbara’ (a plan of action formulated by Raza students and professors in 1969) which called for bringing the university to the community and the community to the University. It has been this philosophy, with few exceptions, that has guided Voz Fronteriza for over twenty years.
“While most movement newspapers ceased to exist after a couple of years of production; have become so ‘mainstream’ assimilationist that you can’t call them movement oriented; or have become ‘social rags’ (centered around parties or other social-entertainment issues), Voz has for over twenty years adhered to progressive and anti-colonial politics. There are several reasons for this. One, Voz has never detached itself from the community. Most of its members have actively gotten involved in struggle and community groups (Raza Rights Coalition). It has historically opened itself up to community groups, bringing people to work on the production of the paper and other forms of propaganda. This has kept Voz from losing its class and nationalist character. Another reason has been its openness, non-dogmatic and non-sectarian approach to its work. Voz has been willing to allow different perspectives, as long as they are progressive and Raza self-determination oriented, to be expressed in its pages. Lastly, its close alliance and willingness to work with progressive organizations has kept Voz from venturing to ridiculous and petty-bourgeois style of politics we see often coming from student publications. The ‘connections’ that Voz has had with groups such as CASA, Committee on Chicano Rights (CRR), and Unión del Barrio, have served as a guide for correct, serious, and progressive struggle.” (Read, “Committed to the community and for fundamental change in society: 20th Anniversary of Voz Fronteriza”, Voz Fronteriza, June 1995)
Taking Voz Fronteriza as an example, it is clear, that MEChA can only be a viable movement organization if it is tied to community activism and is an integral part of the over all struggle for Raza liberation.
(2) To utilize the mobilization and organizing that was going into the building of the 20th Commemoration, to bring together progressive Raza into a national movement that would effectively struggle against the daily oppression confronting the majority of nuestra Raza.
° Another line pushed to “disband” the NCMC as they felt that commemorating the 20th anniversary of Aug. 29th was their only reason for their participation in the NCMC. Also found within this faction, were those who felt that the NCMC was “duplicating” the work of other organizations; yet they would not identify who these organizations were. People advancing this line were Gabriel Hernandez and some forces from the National Chicano Human Rights Council. Again, within the ranks of those pushing this line were those who felt threatened by the strengthening of the NCMC.
° The third line of thought, which was the majority view, favored the strengthening of the NCMC. This line believed in using NCMC as the vehicle by which to unite all progressive Chicano Mexicano nationalist forces, and eventually transforming it into a “united front” of independent organizations that would function under progressive self-determination-based principles of unity. Unión del Barrio was found within the ranks of those who advanced this point of view.
Needless to say, these cowards did not say one thing openly to the NCMC members present at the Albuquerque conference. Other mocoso types did disrupt other workshops - specifically one where Chicano Studies Professor Rudy Acuña was speaking, calling him a sexist. They also managed to turnoff many MEChA’s when they led a “secret Califas only caucus” which was not part of the conference agenda). Furthermore they were central to changing the name of the yearly conferences from “National Chicano Student Conference” to “National MEChA Conferences” and to deny the participation in these conferences to any Raza student organization or youth group who did not go by the name of MEChA. It was at this particular conference in Albuquerque, that we saw clearly the line that some MEChA’s were pushing as a political tendency which moved the student movement away from nationalist liberation politics and community-barrio struggles, to one that called for unity with the Liberal Democrats (politicos), reactionary Gay-Lesbian and anti-men so-called “feminists.” It was also a line that opposed “revolutionary nationalist struggle” and upheld anthropological nationalism; a form of cultural nationalism based solely on indigenous mythology, tribalism, and spiritualism - versus the vibrant and dynamic (changing) culture as practiced by the masses of the Mexicano people.
(2) How does MEChA justify working with sellouts and the Democratic Party, yet is in opposition to working with Raza community organizations?
(3) Was MEChA lied to or used by the Hispanic vendidos?
Instead, the Cesar Fernandez position paper claimed that:
(1) by the Unión writing, “MEChistas you have been lied to! You have been used!” (by the vendidos), it “seeks to divide MEChA by chapters, and pit MEChista against MEChista.”
(2) MEChA does not have to answer to the RRC/NCMC
(3) the RRC/NCMC is promoting views “as an alternative to MEChA.
To us it is incredible that this situation should exist - especially if we take into account that these Universities have a higher Raza enrollment and some have full-fledged Chicano Studies Departments or Chicano Studies Centers. It is also in these Universities where you find Chicano Mexicano professors who have “published” books on the movement and so-forth. So with all the resources that the above mentioned Universities have -why have they not been able to produce a newspaper of the caliber of Voz Fronteriza? We can find the answer in an article written in commemoration of the Voz’s 20 years of publication”