|
The Myth of Aztlán
By Arturo Perez, WireTap
|
|
That day's topic was on the supposed desire of Mexican-Americans to create a new country, sometimes referred to as Aztlán, out of the American Southwest and northern Mexico. Sensationalism quickly superceded fair and balanced journalism to present a frighteningly biased account of the threat posed by immigration. Had it been the only time I'd come across such a view I would have easily forgotten about it, but it wasn't. The desire of a few individuals to create a new nation has been presented inaccurately on popular news programs and widely read articles. The continued propagation of such a biased view is dangerous because it stigmatizes millions of immigrants as traitors to the United States -- and it contradicts all evidence available on Mexican immigration.
Such opinions are not surprising given our country's history of mistreating recent immigrants. At various points in history, the Irish, Italians, Chinese, Jews and Japanese have been lambasted by "native" Americans for their religion or appearance. Luckily, the cheap labor provided by these groups always trumped racist sentiments and the groups were allowed to assimilate (to varying degrees) into American life.
Behind the extremist views there is a legitimate concern about the impact of immigration on all Americans. Issues such as national security, job losses and environmental degradation are impacted by immigration and should be discussed as openly and honestly as possible. However, many in the country have seized on the lingering trauma of 9/11 to advance a malicious and xenophobic agenda.
Pouncing on this fear, pundits have been more than willing to promote the radical desire of a few Mexican-Americans to arouse nationalist sentiment. That small number of Mexican-Americans want to create a new country out of the American Southwest and northern Mexico. They believe the large Hispanic population in these areas could vote to secede from the United States.
The basis of this new nation lies in an old legend chronicling the Aztec migration south from Aztlán, their homeland, to central Mexico. Aztlán's location is now believed to be somewhere in the American Southwest. In the 1960s, Chicano movements rediscovered this myth and used it to develop pride in their heritage. Instead of viewing themselves as foreigners, they realized they had actually returned home.
Known by many names, including Aztlán, Reconquista (Reconquest) and Republica del Norte (Republic of the North), this attempt at creating a new nation supports pundits' belief that immigrants are here to destroy the United States. Populist pundit Bill O'Reilly, for example, has these people calling for Aztlán on his show more than he should. This plan is presented to the audience as something representative of the general Mexican population. The thousands of illegal immigrants arriving daily, they argue, are implicit actors in this goal. O'Reilly presents the plan for Reconquista as a real possibility rather than the distant dream that it actually is.
As a matter of fact, there is strong evidence that contradicts O'Reilly's claims and shows that there is no implicit scheme to conquer the US. In reality, immigration is an essential economic benefit to the United States and many immigrants end up here because it's practical -- not because they want to take over.
Geography
If the American Civil War taught us anything, it's the impossibility of any state or region seceding from the United States without a serious military response from Washington. And now Washington has bigger guns.
Americans are terrible geographers. We know who Britney Spears is dating (or divorcing) but have trouble locating Afghanistan on a map -- even though we were bombing it. Perhaps this is why it is lost on people that the primary reason Mexican immigrants come to the US is simple convenience. Since immigration is usually a last resort, a location near one's homeland is more desirable than one farther away. Luckily for Mexicans, their closest neighbor happens to be the wealthiest nation in the history of civilization.
Because of this closeness, the two countries have had a long -- and sometimes troublesome -- relationship. In 1846, the United States started a war with Mexico to gain her territory and in the peace treaty that followed all Mexican citizens in the conquered lands automatically became American citizens if they did not leave. The majority of the Mexicans living in the territories chose to remain and automatically became citizens. During the Mexican Revolution (1910-1917) thousands of refugees arrived in the US and many did not return.
So despite what you may hear on conservative talk shows, the reason there are so many Mexicans in the US has nothing to do with a sinister desire to take over the US. It simply has to do with the geographic proximity of the two countries.
Economics
Every American knows that if they travel to Mexico, their US dollars buy them much more than here. Mexicans also realize this: if they are paid in US dollars and spend them in Mexico, a few dollars will go a long way. A Mexican immigrant who has been in this country less than 10 years makes, on average, a little over $15,000 a year (1). Compared with the Mexican per capita income of about $5,300 (2), someone making minimum wage in the US can live well in Mexico. While we consider $15,000 to be poverty-level income, it's a generous amount in rural Mexico.
Simple economic opportunism is not solely responsible for the millions of immigrants -- the Mexican government is also to blame. Mexican politics are as dirty as ours except they don't have enough money to cover it up. Corruption is an institution that has prevented development of the country since its birth. Lack of opportunity, coupled with two currency devaluations in the last 20 years has left some with little choice but to leave.
Some in Mexico view the exodus of millions of people as an embarrassment while others as an escape valve for social unrest. Either way, people find it hard to complain about the $14.5 billion sent back by immigrants in 2002, surpassing tourism to become the country's second largest source of income, after petroleum (3).
Here in the US, most politicians and citizens will never openly support immigration on the scale that has occurred, yet are quick to exploit the labor it provides. Corporations such as Wal-Mart and Tyson Foods have used cheap and illegal immigrant labor, as do many restaurants and hotels. And let's not forget the agriculture industry, which depends on cheap immigrant labor.
California's Central, Salinas and San Joaquin Valleys are teeming with undocumented workers, as are Washington apple orchards and Texan cotton fields. These are the least desirable jobs because they require back-breaking labor, are outdoors, require exposure to pesticides, and pay the lowest wages. I wonder if these are the jobs conservative pundits claim immigrants are taking from Americans.
Once again, Mexicans are in the US because of economics, not some crazy desire to steal a part of the country. A porous border and thousands of willing employers make the US a welcoming place for someone looking for a job. Everyday, we Americans support this immigration, legal or otherwise, because we want to pay less for our hotel room, yard work and car wash. Everyone wants the cheap lunch, but no one wants to wash the dishes.
NAFTA
The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is the most complex reason for Mexican immigration to the US, but it highlights our own role, as thrifty consumers, in the immigration process. NAFTA, as sold to Americans and Mexicans, was supposed to greatly increase trade between the nations, create jobs and increase everyone's overall wealth.
And that it did: trade between Mexico and the US increased by 25% (for a total of $100 billion) from 1993 to 1994, the year NAFTA was enacted. In 2003 that trade stood at $215 billion (4). But NAFTA also had other effects on the Mexican and American economy.
NAFTA's first effect was to open up Mexican agricultural markets to American competition. American agricultural conglomerates, recipients of billions of dollars in government subsidies, were able to export corn and other crops to Mexico -- at prices below Mexican ones. Small and less competitive farmers were forced to abandon their farms and seek jobs in the industrial sector. By no sheer coincidence, these former farmers found plenty of work in northern Mexico.
NAFTA made it possible for American corporations to shift their production and assembly lines south of the border, where labor could be had for much less, without paying tariffs to bring the goods into the country. Jobs were created in Mexico -- at the expense of American ones -- and were filled by farmers unable to compete in the new NAFTA economic model. From 1994 to 2003, employment at maquiladoras doubled (5).
These factories, commonly called maquiladoras, are concentrated in the border region for quick delivery to the American market. Now American companies, ever the slyest capitalists, have found a cheaper source of labor in China and other Asian nations and have begun shifting some production to those countries.
In a period of only ten years, hundreds of thousands of Mexicans moved to fill jobs at the maquiladoras only to now find themselves victims of the never-ending quest for cheap labor. Since 2000, the industry has cut 300,000 jobs (5). In retrospect, NAFTA forced many Mexicans out of traditional work and led them into assembly jobs near the border. As these workers lose their jobs, it is easy for them to cross the border and find other, better-paying jobs.
The free-trade supported by many conservatives is turning out to be a cause of the continued immigration from Mexico and Central America that they so despise. Instead of immigrants being here to take us over, many of them are here because of our misguided economic policies. Talk show commentators can blame immigration on whatever they want, but they should recognize their own role in the matter.
Assimilation
Regardless of what brought them here, millions of Mexican immigrants have arrived in the last decade alone. If current trends continue, they will soon account for over 50% of the population in the Southwest (6). But is their ultimate goal to carve out a new nation? If the beliefs and actions of immigrants are any indication, the answer is a resounding "No!"
The first indicator of assimilation is the degree to which the native language is abandoned. Although most immigrants retain their native language, they instill in their children the belief that English is the key to success. Parents are so successful in instilling this belief that only 7% of the second-generation (children of immigrants) retains Spanish as its primary language (7). The acquisition of English is often accompanied by other measures of assimilation, such as social values, identity and economic success.
On issues such as abortion, homosexuality and divorce, first generation immigrants hold values more conservative than the average American's -- by a large margin. Acceptance of abortion is common in the US, with 43% support, but only 16% Mexican immigrants show that support. These traditional values quickly erode, however, as the children and grandchildren adopt more liberal and American mores (8).
Another indicator of assimilation is how people identify themselves. In the Mexican community, as with all other Latin American communities, it is especially difficult. There are so many labels one can use that it almost becomes irrelevant or the descriptions become interchangeable. The Pew Hispanic Center/Kaiser Family Foundation recently conducted a poll on this issue with surprising results.
The survey found that those born in the US were the most likely to identify themselves as American, following the traditional pattern of assimilation. Additionally, every subsequent generation decreases the use of the term "Mexican" as an identifier. Fourth-generation immigrant Homar Martinez, a 23 year-old Californian, identifies himself as Mexican-American, rejects the term Chicano and only uses Hispanic "if I have to." More importantly, if he were in a foreign country he would present himself as an American, not a Mexican-American.
The most astonishing fact is that those identifying themselves as American tend to fit at least one of three categories: well educated; high-income bracket; English-speaking household (9).
Aztlán
Although the vast majority of assimilated immigrants are unlikely to support the creation of a new Aztlán, some in the Mexican-American community would no doubt like to see it become a reality. These proponents tend to be people born and educated in the US who hold a romanticized version of what life in Mexico is like, not those recent immigrants whose reality of Mexico caused them to leave.
University of New Mexico Professor Charles Truxillo, who was on the "The O'Reilly Factor," believes Aztlán will come to existence through electoral pressure by a Hispanic majority. Unfortunately for people like Mr. Truxillo, Hispanic does not necessarily mean Mexican and it is unlikely other Latin Americans would choose to become part of Mexico or any other country. Also, the migration of Mexicans to less traditional states like Iowa and Virginia is diluting their numbers and thus weakening their electoral power.
Mr. Truxillo and his associates are trapped in a circular dialogue with conservative commentators, with each side shutting out the opinion the majority of people it claims to represent. Rather than focusing on the conditions that cause immigration, they are shamefully using immigration as a vehicle to advance their personal agendas.
What has emerged is not the image of a group of people bent on conquering the United States, but one that was failed by its government and invited by its wealthy neighbor to move and do the hard work. That they remained here was inevitable and that they are assimilating means they're not leaving. Despite efforts by both extremes to prove the opposite, Mexican immigrants are assimilating almost as fast as previous immigrant groups. Their large numbers are redefining what it means to be "American," and that's what frightens both sides
As immigrants arrive and assimilate into America, they thwart the fantastic dreams to recreate Aztlán because as mainstream America accepts them, immigrants will feel more at home and not want to separate themselves from America.
For American conservatives, the very nature of the immigrants is threatening: they are of mixed blood, Catholic and are not educated. They already constitute a majority in some areas of the country and will continue to change the meaning of what it is to be an American.
Arturo Perez is a 23-year-old editorial intern for WireTap.
Sources:
1. Center for Immigration Studies (CIS)
http://www.cis.org/articles/2001/mexico/poverty.html
2. World Bank
http://devdata.worldbank.org/external/CPProfile.asp?SelectedCountry=MEX&CCODE=MEX&CNAME=Mexico&PTYPE=CP
3. Thompson, Ginger, A Surge in Money Sent Home by Mexicans The New York Times, October 28 , 2003.
4. US Census Bureau, http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c2010.html
5. Maquiladora Industry Update, http://www.dallasfed.org/data/data/maq_charts.pdf
6. diversityonline.org, US Census Bureau, "The Hispanic Pop in the US: March 2002," June 2003.
7. Suro, Roberto & Passel, Jeffrey S., The Rise of the Second Generation: Changing Patterns in Hispanic Population Growth, Pew Hispanic Center, OCT 2003.
8. Brodie Mollyann & Roberto Suro, 2002 National Survey of Latinos, Pew Hispanic Center & The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, December 2002
9. Brodie Mollyann & Roberto Suro, 2002 National Survey of Latinos, Pew Hispanic Center & The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, December 2002