Soc 105 Ch. 9

Mexican Labor in the 1920s

*Where Mexicans moved and what type of work they did was determined by the economic and political changes of previous years*. For example, improved transportation brought the increased industrialization of the Southwest—and, in turn, the growth of the region's cities and the mega growth of commercial agriculture. *the Literacy Act of 1917* slowed European immigration, as did WW1, thus increasing the reliance on Mexican labor as demand for pick-and-shovel work grew - *Although many were moving to the cities, agriculture was still a major employer of Mexicans*. The increased demand for Mexican labor also encouraged Mexican Americans from New Mexico, Texas, and elsewhere in the Southwest to migrate to other parts of the United States for agricultural and nonagricultural work. -during the 19th and early 20th centuries, Mexicans freq. settled in enclaves that had prev. housed large #'s of EU immigrants = this often led to clashes with the EU ethnic groups, who considered them competitors in the workplace and housing market *the city however offered positive experiences* - older workers socialized the more recent arrivals and in a sense contributed to building their political vocab. - Mexican immigrants often participated in workers' strike actions (cities also provided Mexican-origin children more opp. to attend school) With the spread of factory farms and the mega production of crops such as cotton, demand for migrant labor soared; between 1918 and 1921, the Arizona Cotton Growers Association (ACGA) imported over 30,000 Mexicans. Meanwhile, mine owners displaced many Mexican miners, some of whom then became farmworkers. The displaced miners brought with them collective memories of the militant mining strikes that occurred during the first two decades of the century. - although highly industrialized, the factory farms resembled the old haciendas, were forced-labor systems such as the repartimiento would deliver Native Mexicans to the mayordomo (under the new system, contractors delivered Mexicans to the growers) - abuse was rampant - in 1919, La Liga Protectora Latina of Arizona filed charges of bullying and abuse of Mexican workers against Rafael Estrada, a labor contractor for cotton growers in Arizona. The Arizona Federation of Labor organized cotton pickers in the Salt River Valley. Growers combatted these organizational drives by deporting Mexicans as soon as they complained of low wages and breaches of contract. - This caused hardships: Apolino Cruz was picked up for deportation, and his 8-year-old son was left on a ditch bank. Friends later took the boy to Tempe, and the ACGA sent him unescorted to Mexico. - farming operations were huge and had even worse facilities - Mexican workers were often deported before they were paid

Mexican workers in the Midwest

Better pay and opportunities made migration from Texas into the Midwest attractive. Labor contractors, who distributed workers to various industries and farms, recruited many of the migrants to this region. *Initially, many of the Mexicans worked on the railroads and farms before jumping off into the cities* The railroads paid Mexicans the lowest industrial salaries: 35¢-39¢ an hour. In the 1920s, Mexicans comprised 40 percent of the total railroad maintenance crews of Chicago. Packing houses paid workers 45¢-47¢ an hour, while in steel factories they earned 45¢-50¢ an hour for 8-hour or 44¢ an hour for 10-hour workdays. These salaries were much higher than those in the Southwest and in agriculture in general, but more important was the year-round employment offered in the city. However, even with higher pay, two-thirds of Mexicans in Chicago earned less than $100 a month, which was considered below the poverty line. Not one steel plant in the Midwest employed a supervisor of Mexican extraction. Rank-and-file Euro- American workers openly practiced racism toward Mexican workers. Unions excluded Chicanos from building trades, which generally required citizenship for union membership. The American Federation of Railroad Workers did not have a single Mexican tradesman. Organized labor continued to stereotype Mexicans as wage cutters. Other ethnic groups as well were antagonistic toward Mexicans. Factory tensions carried over into the streets, and many neighborhoods would not rent houses to Mexicans. By the end of the decade, Midwest Mexicans were more urbanized (from just under 70 percent to some 88 percent). Nationwide, by 1930, 40.5 percent of the Mexican males were employed in agriculture, 26 percent in manufacturing, and 16.3 percent in transportation.

Americanization: A Study of Extremes

Between 1900 and 1910, almost 1 million immigrants entered the United States annually - differed from earlier immigrant arrivals (from British isles and northern Europe) - most of the newcomers were southern and central Europeans - The older *WASP* (white Anglo-Saxon Protestant) population, who considered themselves the "real Americans," panicked and initiated a campaign based on fear to put a brake on immigration. - the xenophobes set out to Americanize those who were already in the country (intense campaign to Americanize Mexican fam's) As early as 1892, Mexican children were denied entrance to white schools in towns such as Corpus Christi, Texas *the growing xenophobia of the 1920s saw many public school districts require that students recite the Pledge of Allegiance* - the words "my flag" were replaced w/ "flag of the US" to prevent immigrants and others from swearing allegiance to a foreign flag while facing the American flag Americanization programs encouraged the de facto segregation of Mexican children (reasoning= Mexicans were dirty, shiftless, lazy, irresponsible, thriftless, selfish, promiscuous, and prone to drinking, violence, and criminal beh) [the nativists saw it as their mission to cure these evils by indoctrinating Mexican children, making sure they had an appreciation of the institutions of this country] The continuing popularity and use of Spanish language was considered a "very real educational barrier" to the Americanization of children. The Los Angeles City schools offered adult sessions in evening school and at industrial work sites, day classes for mothers, and naturalization classes. 1915-1929 --- the home teacher, usually a single, middle class WASP woman, was a tool for Americanization efforts aimed at Mexican families --- "learn the American way" // when women did not respond, they blamed it on the patriarchal Mexican fam. Religious missions and grower exchanges (or associations) also prompted campaigns to Americanize workers// IQ testing played a major role in justifying programs that trained Mexicans for subordinate roles in American society. The IQ test was the alleged reason of American educators for not educating Mexicans; the test proved to them that intellectual performance was biologically determined and proved that Mexicans were not capable of learning -.- (why waste tax money in trying to educate them? -pg. 187) Dr. George I. Sanchez - the standardized tests were in English and dealt with things strangely "Anglo" to Mexicans --- he battled throughout his life against standardized tests, segregation based on not being proficient in English, and other forms of racism school districts rationalized that intellectually weaker students should be removed from the "normal" student pop. and tracked separately --- hence, a high % of Mexican students ended up in class for slow learners or mentally retarded; racist school boards abused these programs *before the 1920s Mexican children were not universally segregated* - it became widespread during the 1920s aided by the "no Spanish rule" - the rule of prohibiting Mexican children from speaking Spanish in school (school authorities req. Mexicans to attend Mexican schools, while not restricting white children by neighborhood or even by country) heavy influx of Mexican children = more isolation to the youngsters... the excuse was that Mexican were slow learners --- not many Mexicans attending schools or higher education (this was confuted by the fact that in 1925, Mexican students in San Antonio scored 70% higher on IQ tests given in Spanish than on tests given in English) meanwhile, the district profited from Mexican schools because it spent less on educating Mexican students. It did not care if Mexicans dropped out of school because it could then spend more on the education of white students.

San Antonio's west side

By 1920, San Antonio grew to 161,379 residents, of whom about 60,000 were of Mexican origin. At the end of the decade about 70,000 of the city's 232,542 residents were of Mexican extraction. Some of these were Mexican religious refugees, i.e., those fleeing the so-called religious persecution in Mexico. (The 1920s was at the height of the Cristero movement. many of the new Mexican immigrant arrivals of this decade were middle and upper class, in contrast to the resident population of San Antonio that mostly worked as laborers by 1926 A few businessmen owned small stores and butcher shops; only 21 percent were skilled workers. Opportunities for women were limited; they usually filled lower-status jobs and only occasionally worked in Mexican-run businesses as clerks. As with their male counterparts, women's skin color determined their level of equality. Despite this the social network of Mexican women widened during the decade. This movement to the cities came not without a cost. The existing housing and the labor market could not absorb the flood of Mexicans into San Antonio. Two-thirds of the Mexicans lived in shacks on the West Side, hovels that filled the empty spaces between the warehouses and the rails, and were surrounded by a red-light district. Crowded courts—a series of one- and two-room units sharing a common toilet and a water spigot—barely met the housing needs of the poor. Mexicans also lived in long one-story *corrales* extending 100 yards with overcrowded stalls resembling stables. The workers put up with these unsanitary living conditions and all other miseries to earn a wage of 90¢ to $1.25 a week. The blight worsened with the heavy influx of farmworkers during the off-season. powerless and too poor to pay the poll tax, Mexican Americans voted when diff. interest groups or political parties paid the tab - the Commission Ring as they called it ran the city for the interest of the elites, giving free land to the military to attract bases --- In the 1920s, the $38 million spent annually by military per- sonnel in San Antonio contributed to the merchants' prosperity. However, because the trading installations were not taxed, little money was available for civic improvements. There were few recreation clubs to serve the poor Mexicans, who congregated at Milam Park, waiting to be picked up for day labor—both within the city and as migrant workers. despite these diff's, San Antonio's Mexican pop. was stable and self-help organizations flourished (Between 1915 and 1930, 10,000 Mexicans joined 19 mutualistas and 6 mutualista labor unions in San Antonio; the largest was La Sociedad de la Unión, with more than 1,100 members in 1920. At least one mutualista was headed by a woman, Luisa M. De González. Mutualistas appealed more to families than to young single males or females) *the 1920s also brought an expansion of the social life of the West Side. The wealthy Mexicans frequented separate social clubs, and as a rule did not join the mutualistas As mentioned, the Mexican community supported the numerous Spanish-language newspapers. The most popular was the Spanish-language daily La Prensa that covered a variety of events; Beatriz Blanca de Hinojosa, the wife of the editor, wrote a regular column. Along with Aurora Herrera de Nobregas of La Epoca, Blanca de Hinojosa advocated the end of the double standard for women. *Although some Mexican women expressed feminist ideas, the majority did not*. - an exception, La Prensa, columnist Arianda, wrote that feminism was simply the "realization that women are not inferior to men" - she implored women to become active against alcoholism, militarism, child labor, and the degradation of women. The status of women in the mutualistas varied; most groups admitted women and allowed them to hold office. Contrary to popular myth, not all Mexican women remained at home; 16 percent of Mexican women worked outside the home, compared to 17 percent of all women in Texas. More Mexican than Mexican Texan women were wage earners. As a rule, mutualistas did not allow any political discussions at their meetings. However, members rationalized that the protection of their civil rights was not a political issue so it was proper to discuss them. They regularly allowed groups such as La Liga Pro-Mexicana (1927), a civil rights organization, to use their facilities for free; they also lent the facilities to labor associations. - San Antonio mutualistas avoided radical organizations such as the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW). *class diff's among mutualistas members slowed solidarity among the members and among groups* - even so, members closed ranks in the face of discrimination --- most Mexicans were absorbed with their own economic survival (for the most part, the mutualistas maintained close ties w/ the Mexican consul (ambassador), who freq. attended their functions)

Mexican workers in Texas

Differentials in pay rates played a big part in geographic dispersion. For instance, in Texas a cotton picker averaged $1.75 a day; in Arizona, $2.75; in California, $3.25; and—ironically, considering they were former slave states—in Arkansas, Louisiana, and Mississippi, $4. One reason Texas growers kept wages low was their belief that lower wages would limit the resources of Mexicans, making it more difficult for them to leave. Texas growers shared the obsession of California and Arizona growers with creating and controlling a large surplus labor pool. Texas relied heavily on migrant labor, much of which it recruited directly from Mexico.65 Because Texas Mexicans were mostly landless and dependent on wages, they were especially vulnerable to exploitation. A form of debt peonage existed: local sheriffs arrested Mexicans by enforcing vagrancy laws and then contracted the arrested workers to local farmers. Law enforcement officials deceived Mexicans into believing that they would face imprisonment if they left without paying commissary debts. Cotton growers also tried to hold on to Mexican workers by restraining the recruitment drives of northern sugar beet companies.

Keeping America Blond and White

Euro-Americans wanted to keep America "American" by ensuring a Nordic look. After years of debate over keeping the United States an Aryan nation, Congress passed the Emergency Quota Act of 1921, which limited the annual number of immigrants who could be admitted from any country to 3 percent of the number of persons from that country living in the United States in 1910. The total number to be admitted under the 1921 quota was 357,802 people. Of that number, just over half was allocated for northern and western Europeans and the remainder for eastern and southern Europeans. - The Immigration Act of 1924, also known as the National Origins Act or the Johnson-Reed Act, then limited the number of immigrants who could be admitted from any country to 2 percent of the number of persons from that country who were already living in the United States in 1890. The law was aimed at further restricting southern and eastern Europeans, limiting their number to 164,000 annually, as well as East Asians and Asian Indians, who were excluded entirely. President Calvin Coolidge, when signing the bill into law, said, "America must be kept American," and the law ushered in generations of racial engineering. The quotas drastically reduced the flow of immigrants from southeastern Europe, since they were a relatively small percentage of new arrivals in the United States in the late 1800s. However, the act set no limits on immigrants from Latin America; their presence was necessary to the functioning of the Southwest's economy. -the act started a battle b/w the restrictionists, who wanted to keep the country WASP (white Anglo Saxon Protestant) and felt that too many foreigners would subvert the "American way of life" and the capitalists, who set aside prejudices toward Mexicans b/c they needed cheap labor Many of the growers recalled that the 1917 act had initially restricted the flow of Mexican immigrants, creating a severe labor shortage that hurt them financially; thus, the western growers opposed any restrictions on the free flow of Mexicans into the United States. By 1923, the economy had sufficiently recovered to again entice Mexican workers to the United States in large numbers. Antirestrictionists responded that enforcing such a quota would be difficult, that Mexicans stayed only temporarily anyway, that they did the work white men would not, and that an economic burden would result. In order to compensate, border officials strictly applied the $8 head tax, in addition to the $10 visa fee. However, Mexicans continued to enter the States with and without documents. Meanwhile, Johnson's committee began hearings on the Mexican problem. The quota act had drastically reduced the available labor pool, and agricultural and industrial interests committed themselves to keeping the Mexican unrestricted. (pg. 203)

the move to the cities

Mexican immigrants lived in large cities and small villages; many worked seasonally in agriculture and on railroad crews; others sought stable situations in the face of major adjustments in the United States. *The first wave of Mexican immigrants was largely composed of single males*. Mexican immigrants in general were apt to return home at some point—either to bring their wives and families or, in the case of single Mexican males, to marry Mexican-born females and return to the States with them. - the influx of women expedited the foraging of a community within the US - that is, the bonding of Mexicans w/ others of the same race within a specific space - The early arrival of the family distinguished Mexicans from the European immigrant communities, where the ratio of men to women was always much higher. - By 1920, 50 percent of all Mexican immigrants were comprised of women and children. presence of women and children generally suggested permanency, and many communities formed within the existing Mexican American enclaves. Formation of community had both positive and negative fallouts: the presence of their families often made workers more vulnerable and discouraged militant behavior that might put their families at risk.

Nationalism v. Americanization

Racist nativism generalized all social and economic classes of Mexicans. In defense of their culture Mexican Americans reacted organizationally. Mexican consulates sponsored honorary societies, which were intended to foster, among other things, nationalism. in CA, Mexicans sponsored escuelitas (private schools) throughout the state - though, these efforts proved grossly inadequate to serve the increasing numbers of immigrants in Texas and Arizona too, the immigrant pop. became more nationalistic and moved to preserve their Mexican identity by forming escuelitas (5 yrs later, the Mexican Ministry of Education sent reps. to help set up escuelitas whose aim was to disprove the popular notion that Mexicans were backwards peasants and had to Americanize to learn) - a subtle division was taking shape b/w 1st and 2nd generations

The influx of WW1 on Becoming Mexican American

Returning from World War I, many of the Mexican American veterans became more involved in politics. In Texas, which had the largest Mexican American population, this experience paved the way for new organizations that differed from the older mutual-aid societies. - many new organizations were more concerned w/ members acquiring US citizenship and becoming Mexican American than they were w/ maintaining Mexican culture As a rule, the veteranos (veterans) pursued their political rights more aggressively than did the first generation, because they felt entitled as veterans. This is not to say that the mutualistas disappeared, or that Mexican and Mexican American veterans did not belong to mutualistas, but merely that the issues addressed by the new organizations, as well as those by the mutualistas, changed. (ex. after the war, the mutual aid societies petitioned President Woodrow Wilson to do something about the negative stereotyping of Mexicans in the movies; and in 1922-23, Mexicans protested what they called the Ku-Klux-Klan -Texas Ranger alliance) By the 1920s, many Mexican Americans came to accept that they would not be returning to Mexico and began to distinguish between Tejanos and Mexicans. Today, some Mexican Americans still smart over the fact that David Barkley, the first person of Mexican descent to win a Congressional Medal of Honor, enlisted in the U.S. Army using his Anglo father's name to avoid being segregated. - it was not till 71 yrs later that his Mexican lineage became known - although not all Mexican Americans were war vets, the veterans' presence influenced the dev. of a comm. identity ---they contributed to a growing sense that Mexican Americans were citizens and equals *The intergroup differences between Mexicans and Mexican Americans became noticeable during these years*. For example, the Hijos de México (Sons of Mexico), organized in San Antonio in 1897, admitted only Mexican citizens and promoted Mexican culture. The association disbanded in 1914, but reorganized nine years later. In 1921, Professor Sáenz, along with Santiago Tafolla (a lawyer) and other Mexican Ameri- can World War I veterans and professionals, formed La Orden de Hijos de América (the Order of the Sons of America). This was a transitional organization that did not insist on U.S. citizenship as a membership requirement; it did, however, emphasize the betterment of the Mexican American in the United States. Within two years, Los Hijos de América had 250 members and three branches in south Texas. - by 1922 Los Hijos de America split and a dissident (opposed) group, Los Hijos de Texas was formed. [Led by police officer Feliciano G. Flores and attorney Alonso S. Perales, the society worked for the interests of Americans of Mexican extraction. In 1927, they formed La Orden de Caballeros (the Order of Knights). Some of the leaders of these groups also held offices in the various mutualistas, and Los Hijos de América was a member of the San Antonio Alliance of Mutualista Societies. However, leaders such as Perales and Sáenz never joined mutualistas, and they typified the post-World War I leadership among Mexican Americans]

Protestant Churches and Americanization of the Mexican

The Catholic Church often interpreted Americanization as being synonymous with Protestantism and resisted the Americanization programs because Church leaders saw Mexicans as exclusively Catholic— though, generally, as unequal members. While most Protestant churches considered Mexicans primitive, there were exceptions. - For instance, some Protestant churches recruited Spanish-speaking ministers, many of whom were Latinos and Mexicans. This was a tradition that dated back to the Protestant missionary work in the nineteenth century in Mexico. One of the most popular methods of converting Mexicans was through youth programs such as the Young Men's Christian Association (YMCA) that conducted surveys and published valuable studies on Mexican American communities. The work of the Protestant churches cannot be overstated. There were 60 Mexican Protestant churches in Texas as well as a network in Mexico. - The response of the Catholic Church depended on what proportion of a diocese was Mexican. - For instance, the Protestant challenge to traditional Catholicism nudged Los Angeles Bishop John J. Cantwell to organize—with some opposition from within—the Immigrant Welfare Department within Associated Catholic Charities. - In Los Angeles, Lucey (Father Robert E. Lucey) launched a major campaign to include Mexicans in Church affairs, and even established a free health clinic within the Santa Rita Settlement House. The Church distributed religious books written in Spanish to Mexican Catholics, and organized Confraternity of Christian Doctrine (CCD) to serve youngsters from public schools.

Mexicans in the Northwest

The Mexican community also grew in Utah, where they worked for the railroads, in mines, and on farms. At the beginning of the 1920s, 1,200 Mexicans lived in Utah; 10 years later the number grew to more than 4,000. Juan Ramón Martínez, a native of New Mexico, founded the Provisional Lamanite Branch of the Church of the Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) in 1921. - the mid 1920s saw the formation of the usual mutualistas, along w/ Mexican protective associations such as La Cruz Azul (the Blue Cross, a Mexican govt. self-help group) - Small numbers of Mexicans also lived in Idaho, Washington, and Oregon in the 1920s. Mexicans had individually moved to these states before World War I. After the war, sugar beet companies imported Mexicans to Idaho. By the 1920s decade, families made up a significant portion of the immigration; men, however, still comprised 65-70 percent of immigrants—even though women may have joined the males by entering without documents to avoid crossing fees.

Mexicans and Mexican Americans

The massive influx of Mexican immigrants posed a challenge to working-class Mexican Americans by competing with them in the labor market. There was also resentment among middle-class Mexican Americans toward better-off Mexicans that was also predictable since it was the sector most affected by competition from the incoming Mexican middle class; as small as it was, *the Mexican middle class was better educated than the Mexican American middle class* Moreover, conditioned by history, the Mexican American middle class was very conscious of the darker hue of the recently arrived working class; on the other hand, the pretensions of newly arrived middle- and upper-class Mexican political refugees made them uneasy. The Mexican elites' disdain for the pocho16 (a pejorative term for Mexican Americans who have become Americanized) and the perceived inferiority of "American" culture also unsettled many Mexican Americans. (despite the tensions, w/ time they adjusted to each other) -EA racism played an impt. role in this adjustment as well as in defining the comm) - since most outsiders did not distinctions b/w Mexican-born and Mexican American, they considered them all "greasers" The divide between the two groups varied not only from class to class, but also from region to region and from state to state. For example, the old California Mexican families—the Californios—did not play as important a role as the old families did in Texas. The Californios exhibited biases toward the Mexicans and did not relate to them politically, socially, or culturally. The bulk of the older Spanish-speaking New Mexican population lived in the north, where some of the New Mexicans voiced prejudices toward the surrumatos (a pejorative term meaning "southerner" or "Mexican"). A sizable out-migration of manitos—as other Mexicans knew New Mexicans, because they used the word hermanito (little brother)—took place during this decade. As early as 1870, manitos could be found in the mining camps of Arizona, where they were categorized simply as Mexicans. This population played an important role in the fight for equality, as its members were often the civil rights leaders.

Los Angeles: "Where only the Weeds grow"

The organizational life of Mexicans in Los Angeles resembled that of San Antonio, but it also differed. Mutualistas, as in San Antonio, met the immigrant families' "basic needs," such as maintaining their culture and when possible defending their civil rights. However, the mutualistas did not play the central role they did in San Antonio, partly because the Mexican-origin population of Los Angeles was widely scattered; also, proportionately San Antonio had a larger Mexican American population than did Los Angeles. The Mexican consul in Los Angeles played an influential role in establishing mutualista-like organizations, such as La Cruz Azul (the Blue Cross) for women and La Comisión Honorífica (the Honor Commission) for men. These organizations were engaged in charitable work under the consul's auspices. Many women's organizations were active during the 1920s. A group called La Sociedad de Madres Mexicanas was organized in Los Angeles in 1926 to help raise funds for the civil or criminal defense of Mexicans. Las Madres (The Mothers), or Madrecitas (Little Mothers), as they were called, supported cases that others ignored. One of their most noteworthy was that of Juan Reyna of Los Angeles. Police officers had called him a "dirty Mexican" and "you filthy Mexican" while dragging him off to jail. The officers' anger was provoked because Reyna disarmed them in a scuffle, shot and killed one officer, and wounded another before being subdued. Reyna was unrepentant and said he wished he'd killed all three for their racist insults. Reyna went through sensational trials, which the Mexican public attended, before he mysteriously died in prison. Corridos (folk ballads) immortalized him as a defender of his dignity *a measure of Mexicans' Americanization was discernible as Mexicans became mass consumers* - The automobile changed adolescents and youth overall. It enabled them to leave the confines of the barrio and to visit the downtown commercial center, and indulge in window-shopping, which became a favorite pastime. - Youth became more fashion-conscious, going in for the latest in dresses. Euro-American entertainment had a tremendous impact—especially the motion pictures. One-third of the Mexican households owned a radio, which exposed them to American pop music. However, Spanish-language entertainment remained popular, and it had its place alongside Euro-American movies and music. - Carpas (tent theaters) were the main entertainment providers throughout the nineteenth and into the twentieth century. Many troupes came from Mexico City, enacting classic as well as popular plays. These theaters kept alive the oral traditions of the people. Immigrants and the native-born were seated according to their class, with admission prices determining the seating arrangement of the audience.

the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC)

The progression to an exclusively Mexican American organization was completed with the formation of the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC). For many years, Tejanos discussed the need for a statewide organization that had the potential to become national. In 1927 Alonso Perales called together leaders of various organizations from south Texas to explore the possibility of merging into a single organization. *Two years later, on February 17, 1929, in Corpus Christi, Los Caballeros de América of San Antonio, Los Hijos de América of Corpus Christi, and the League of Latin American Citizens of South Texas merged to form LULAC*. - the founding members represented both the educated elite and the lower and middle class - fluent in English and highly urbanized, they worked on civil rights issues such as the betterment of schools and voter registration drives, much in the same tradition as other racial and ethnic groups (for them, political and social equality was synonymous w/ being American) - they wanted economic, social, and racial equality, although women did not become voting members until 1933 [the formation of LULAC marked a milestone in Chicano civil rights history] LULAC also represented a new direction in the organizational history of persons of Mexican origin in the United States. Before LULAC was formed, many issues of the Mexican and Mexican American com- munity emanated from south of the Rio Grande, and not from the United States. For instance, the com- munity was concerned with the Mexican Revolution and whether or not the United States would intervene. - Now, community leaders acted on their own behalf as Americans struggling against discrimination and inequality. With the formation of LULAC, the leadership demanded their rights as U.S. citizens. The forma- tion of LULAC also represented a symbolic break with the Mexican consular leadership. In Texas, Spanish-language newspapers addressing Mexican American issues increased after the war. They represented a separate worldview, different than that of the immigrant press. La Prensa of San Antonio catered to the Mexican exiles, and Evolución and El Demócrata of Laredo catered to the local crowd. - "For La Prensa, these dough boys exemplify the fighting ideals of la raza; in contrast, La Evolución presents Mexican American servicemen as patriotic American citizens." (pg. 191) The self-identity of the new immigrants sometimes varied from the attitudes of the Mexican Americans. Often it was based on the latter's jealousy and/or the snobbery of the Mexican intelligentsia. This division at times was reflected in the content of the newspapers. La Prensa betrayed the elitist notion of a Spanish cultural heritage, while other Mexican papers downplayed the Spanish past and exalted the Mexicans' indigenous past. LULAC expressed the view of the new Mexican American generation when it excluded noncitizens - This exclusion has been labeled by critics as racist and anti-Mexican. But in fairness to LULAC founders, they were expressing the common sense of the civil rights movement of the time. Many of its goals and political strategies paralleled those of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). Although LULAC leadership stated that it did not want to offend Mexican nationals, it did distinguish between "Americans of Latin extraction" and the "peon class." - LULAC leader Judge J. T. Canales also played a key role in the exclusion of Mexican nationals. His rationale was that Mexicans were not skillful enough to work in the political arena, and, therefore, only American citizens of Mexican origin should form the new organization. According to the Spanish-language newspaper El Comercio, Canales said, "This organization should be integrated by Mexican Americans exclusively, since Mexicans from MEXICO are a PITIFUL LOT who come to this country in great caravans to retard the Mexican Americans' work for unity that should be at the Anglo-Saxon's level."

Conclusion: Moving to the City

This loss in status would not go unnoticed by Mexican Americans. Other subtle changes occurred, such as listing the same person as "Pedro" in 1920 and "Pete" in 1930, and changing "Francisco" to "Frank" and "Miguel" to "Mike." Such changes, though not universal, were frequent enough to be noted. Americanization was having an impact on the second generation; more students were confused about their identity. All in all, however, it was the city and its bright lights and material symbols that caused the greatest changes. Increasingly Mexicans, like other residents of the country, traveled to the downtown areas where many would seek out an escape from the drudgery of work. It was not only the radio, the music, and the silent films that intruded into their lives, subtly Americanizing them; downtown was a place where even the penniless could walk and admire the window displays of the department stores that featured material goods such as clothing and household items. *The subliminal message was that the goods were available to anyone, if they became American*

Mexicans in the Midwest and Points East

by the late 1920s an estimated 58,000 Mexicans, comprising 4% of the Mexican pop. in the US, lived in the Midwest [Chicago was the midwestern Mexican capital b/c it was a wintering quarter w/ service industries, stockyards, and factories] - 82% of Mexicans in Chicago worked unskilled jobs - The bitter cold in winter made life in Chicago more severe than in the Southwest. As in other cities, in Chicago Mexicans clustered in barrios close to their workplace. They suffered the litany of abuses experienced by the poor, by now familiar to the reader: overcrowded housing, low-paying jobs, inadequate schooling, police harassment, and little hope for the future. Racism, too, was a problem to contend with (ex. competing for limited housing: Mexicans paid $27 a month in rent, an Irish fam. paid $21 for the same accommodation) - Socially, Euro-American Chicagoans segregated Mexicans. In East Chicago, two theater owners limited Mexicans to the African American section; and in Gary, Indiana, a section of the municipal cemetery was reserved for Mexicans. In addition, as elsewhere, the criminal justice system had little sympathy for Mexicans. - It is significant that California with a much larger Mexican population had four sentenced to die in San Quentin in 1926. One response was from the mutualistas, which, as in the Southwest, petitioned the help of the Mexican consul. Midwestern Mexicans were nationalistic. When Euro-Americans complained that the rights of U.S. citizens were being violated in Mexico, El Correo Mexicano, a Chicago newspaper, on September 30, 1926, replied, "The Chicago Tribune and other North American papers, like the Boston Transcript, should not be scandalized when an American citizen in Mexico is attacked, not by the authorities, as here, but by bandits and highwaymen." Pointing out that police in Chicago and other cities victimized Mexicans on a daily basis, the Correo ridiculed Euro-Americans for calling for immediate justice in Mexico. - in Chicago, police regularly arrested Mexicans for disorderly conduct; in 1928-29, this charge consisted of almost 79% of all misdemeanor offenses Another common booking in Chicago and in the rural Midwest was vagrancy. Polish police officers were especially brutal toward Mexicans and Mexican Americans. They looked upon Mexicans as competitors. A desk sergeant in 1925 readily admitted that he hated Mexicans, and that he had told officers at another station not to take chances with Mexicans: "[they] are quick on the knife and are hot tempered."53 Many arrests used "dragnet" methods—that is, police made sweeps of streets and places like pool halls, arresting Mexicans for carrying a jackknife or on the usual charge of disorderly conduct. -poverty among Mexicans made getting justice difficult, if not impossible since over 3 quarters did not have the $ to hire a lawyer to defend them when they found themselves in trouble --- they quality of the defense attorney - when they could hire one --- was gen. poor, and the inability to speak English handicapped the defendant even further - The success of Protestants at converting Mexicans can be attributed to their offering of social services, legal aid, medical assistance, classes in English, and other forms of aid. The Masons also sponsored three Mexican lodges. In addition, Mexican Americans established societies to aid their poor. In 1924 in St. Paul, Minnesota, Luis Garzán and friends formed the Anahuac Society to sponsor dances to raise money for the needy. - Though church attendance among Catholic Mexicans was low, it is impossible to overestimate the importance of the Catholic Church for Mexicans. For instance, in South Chicago the congregating cen- ter for Mexican Catholics was Our Lady of Guadalupe Chapel, built for Mexican workers by the Inland Steel Company. Apart from providing religious space, the Catholic Church gave Mexicans important social space. The Church was especially important to Mexican families. However, many Catholic parishes were racist and discouraged Mexicans from attending their services. - life for Mexican women was diff. in the Midwest. They were a minority within a minority and their employment opp's outside the home were limited due to the surplus of female labor and by Mexican custom - In 1924, Mexicanas made up less than a third of the Mexican population; 11 years later, they comprised more than 50 percent, which suggests the formation of more permanent communities. Dur- ing the 1920s, Mexican women in Chicago and other cities of the Midwest often relied heavily on their own institutions, such as midwives to deliver children. Mexican women supplemented their family's income w/ most working as domestics; a large number also took in lodgers *the cold winters were an added burden: warm clothing and heating were expensive, and respiratory diseases were common* - life was precarious (risky) at the best: that there were few women made them targets for unwanted sexual advances, and they were vulnerable to abuse -- they lacked support networks that cushioned the effects of spousal abuse and alcoholism, which were much too common within immigrant communities - As with the Irish, the Church hierarchy opposed mili- tant unionism for Mexicans. The U.S. Catholic Church, conditioned by the cristero (Followers of Christ, or Christ Firsters) revolt in Mexico during the 1920s, became even more conservative. (The *cristeros* were militant Catholics who refused to accept the Mexican government's attempts to end the Catholic Church's special privileges.) - Mexicans also moved to Detroit as early as 1918 when Henry Ford imported them to work in his Ford auto plants - Attracted by employment opp's - To help the impoverished and the ill, Mexicans organized three beneficent associations in their small steel colony. In 1927, they founded La Unión Protectora (the Protective Union), which was later disbanded because Mexicans believed that noncitizens were not permitted to organize a union. They organized La Sociedad Azteca Mexicana (the Mexican Aztec Society) the next year; by 1930, it had 130 members. The organization also owned and operated a community hall.

Greasers go Home

in early 1921 the bottom fell out of the economy and a depression caused heavy unemployment. Sarah Deutsch estimates that some 150,000 Mexicans were repatriated during the crisis. Although as a matter of policy the Mexican government welcomed back repatriates, the sudden return of so many to the homeland caught the government off guard. In essence, the Mexican government could not afford the expense of the repatriation. - Mexico was offended by the affront to its citizens and the obvious callousness with which deportations were carried out—an insult to the nation's revolutionary nationalism. -many Mexicans were cheated out of their wages and dumped across the border - men were chained and put into work gangs in Kansas City, Chicago, and Colorado + Phoenix In Fort Worth, Texas, 90 percent of 12,000 Mexicans became unemployed; whites threatened to burn the Mexicans' homes and rid the city of "cheap Mexican labor." Police authorities escorted truckloads of Mexicans to Texas chain gangs. In Ranger, Texas, terrorists dragged 100 Mexican men, women, and children from their tents and makeshift homes, beat them up, and ordered them to clear out of town. Although U.S. corporations and farmers had recruited these workers to the United States in the first place, they and the U.S. government did little to relieve their suffering. The Mexican government, by contrast, spent $2.5 million to aid stranded Mexicans.77 Many workers would have starved to death had it not been for the financial assistance sanctioned by Mexican President Alvaro Obregón.

the formation of Mexican Unions

the earliest Mexican workers came as track laborers - By 1910, there were Mexican colonies in the Imperial Valley and El Centro areas of southern California. As the demand for workers in cantaloupe, lettuce, and cotton grew, so did the demand for Mexicans. Meanwhile, driven largely by cotton, the influx of southern whites and blacks continued. By 1916, this "southern help" was migrating to the San Joaquin Valley, which coincided with the growth of cotton production there. Growers turned more seriously to Mexico after 1917, when sugar beet growers recruited large numbers of Mexicans. By the turn of the decade, Mexicans became the dominant workforce, their concentration depending on the crops. At harvest time, Mexicans composed 90 percent of field workers in the Imperial Valley. The presence of the corporate farms led to the development of gigantic labor pools, which allowed many workers to stay in the same place for longer than was possible earlier, and often to become permanent residents. The involvement of Mexicans in mining before World War I expanded the corps of proletariat workers. Thousands of Mexican miners in Arizona alone, where Mexicans comprised nearly half of the miners in the state, had participated in the intense strikes of the 1910s. These strikes gave organizational experience to a core of Mexican workers who continued to organize in mining and other industries. (ex. La Confederacion Regional Obrera Mexican) - California farmworkers' organizing efforts faced overwhelming opposition by agribusiness owners. Undoubtedly, *many small Mexican labor unions existed; however, they were short lived because of the Mexicans' vulnerability to deportation and the willingness of U.S. capitalists to do anything to disorganize labor*—for example, making even membership in the IWW illegal. In times of labor tensions, agribusiness used immigration authorities to comb Mexican colonias: Mexicans were vulnerable because some 80 percent had no documents. *The most powerful growers' association, the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF), united farmers nationally*. It also had local and state chapters that were linked to chambers of commerce; the American Legion; the National Association of Manufacturers; and local, state, and federal elected officials and law enforcement. In early May, the newly formed union sent cantaloupe growers and the chambers of commerce in Brawley and El Centro letters requesting that wages be increased to 15¢ per standard crate of cantaloupes, or 75¢ an hour; that growers supply free picking sacks and ice; and that growers, not the contractors, be responsible for paying workers' wages. The growers refused. On May 7 workers at the Sears Brothers Ranch walked out. Soon, 2,000-3,000 workers joined the strike. On May 10, Sheriff Charles L. Gillett shut down the union's offices, outlawed all future strikes, and arrested more than 60 union activists.