CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE

M.E.Ch.A.: A Brief Southern California Chicana/o History, 1969-2010

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements For the degree of Master of Arts in Chicana and Chicano Studies

by

Mónica Valenzuela

August 2011

ii

iii

Dedication

This thesis is dedicated to Movimiento Estudiantíl Chicana and Chicano de Aztlan. In

particular, the Mechistas at Pasadena City College (MEChA de PCC) and California

State University Northridge (MEChA de CSUN), you have been my inspiration for this

study. A mi madre Linda Valenzuela quien me enseño la escuela de la vida tiene

significado como la escuela de la Universidad. To my mother Linda Valenzuela who

taught me the school of life is significant like the school of academia. Both have been the

backbone to my education, thank you.

iv

Acknowledgements

In no particular order, I give thanks to Omar González and Abel Correa for believing in

me, especially during graduate school. Luis H. Moreno for your motivation, input, and

research towards this thesis. Armando Lara-Millán, thank you for polishing this

manuscript. Jesus Reyes and Omar Ramírez for sending me resources including your

unconditional support. Dr. Margarita Nieto for encouraging me to stay in graduate

school, having your support always, and giving me the encouragement to persevere in

life, I am privileged to have met you. My thesis chair Dr. Lara Medina for being patient,

available, opening your home, and your constructive feed back/direction, I would have

not completed this paper, thank you. My thesis committee Dr. Sirena Pellarolo and Dr.

Rodolfo F. Acuña for their guidance of this thesis. Chicana/o Graduate Student

Association de C.S.U.N., Jhonny Ramírez and Daniel Valencia. Lupe Orozco who never

failed at making graduate school interesting. Mujeres Activas Letras y Cambio Social de

C.S.U.N. Mónica De La Torre, Lizeth Moya, Maritza Flores, and Nancy Pérez. To the

interview participants Rosa Furumoto, Roberta Orona-Cordova, Erik Mata, and Marcos

Zamora-Sánchez. Gracias.

v

Table of Contents

Signature page…………………………………………………………………………….ii

Dedication………………………………………………………………………………...iii

Acknowledgements….………………………………………………………………........iv

List of Figures……………………………………………………………………………vii

Abstract………….………………………………………………………………………viii

Chapter One: Introduction……….………………………………………………………..1

Introduction…………………………………………………………………………….1 Review of the Literature…......................................................................................2 Methods…………………………………………..................................................11

Chapter Two: The social/political context of MEChA’s Founding………………….......14

Introduction…………………………………………………………………………...14 MEChA and Third World Spaces………………………………………………..15 Origins of MEChA..……………………………………………………………...16 Sexism and El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan………………………………………...19 El Plan de Santa Barbara…………………………………………………………22 Sexism and El Plan de Santa Barbara……………………………………………29 MEChA’s Mottos and Symbolization……………………………………………30 Foundations of MEChA………………………………………………………….33 The Vietnam War………………………………………………………………...36 National Chicano Moratorium Committee………………………………………39 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………….40

Chapter Three: The organizational growth and revisions of MEChA…………………...41

Introduction…………………………………………………………………………...41 Organizational growth of MEChA ………………………………………………42 Philosophy of MEChA …………………………………………………………..46 Sexism and La Mujer in MEChA………………………………………………..52 Raza of Non-Mexican Descent and MEChA ……………………………………57 The LGBTIQ Chicana/o MEChA Community ………………………………….61 Impact of MEChA………………………………………………………………..63 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………….65

Chapter Four: MEChA’s current and future Challenges………………………………...67

Introduction……………………………………………………………………………67

vi

Chicana/o Studies and MEChA………………………………………………….67MEChA as a Support System for Chicana/o Educational Advancement………..69Opponents of Chicana/o Studies, the Immigrant, and MEChA in California…...72and Arizona

MEChA’s Chicana/o Studies Limitations………………………………………..77 40th Anniversary of El Plan de Santa Barbara.…………………………………..78 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………….83

Chapter Five: Conclusion/Reflections…………………………………………………...84

Introduction..……………………………………………………………………….....84 Reflections……………………………………………………………………….84 Summary...…………………………………………………………………….....86

Bibliography…………………………………………………………..............................89

vii

List of Figures

1. El Plan de Santa Barbara, Cover 27

2. MEChA Eagle 31

3. Cuauhtemoc Head 32

4. Positive Representation in Education ¡No to SB 1108!, Flyer 75

5. Save The Date! 40th Anniversary of El Plan de Santa Barbara, Flyer 81

6. 40th Anniversary of El Plan De Santa Barbara M.E.Ch.A. Statewide 82Conference May 22-24 University of California Santa Barbara, Flyer

viii

Abstract

M.E.Ch.A.: A Brief Southern California Chicana/o History, 1969-2010

by

Mónica Valenzuela

Master of Arts in Chicana and Chicano Studies

This thesis provides an overview of the history of MEChA and its impact on

Chicana/o students in Southern California from 1969 to 2010. Chicana and Chicano

studies is an area of study that has been formalized in many universities beginning in the

late 1960s. And though the literature as a result of Chicana and Chicano studies has

grown because of this formalization, only recently has the topic of Movimiento

Estudiantíl Chicana and Chicano de Aztlan (MEChA) become a subject of study in

academic literature. Using a historical narrative of MEChA and the Chicana and Chicano

movement’s fundamental documents such as El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan and El Plan de

Santa Barbara are consulted. These two documents were influential to the creation of this

Chicana/o student movement group.

This thesis will examine closely the history of events that lead to the formation of

MEChA, how it developed, with an analysis of its present standing today by looking at

one of MEChA’s more recent documents called the philosophy of MEChA (1999). Along

with these conversations, it is shown here how MEChA and Chicana and Chicano studies

go hand in hand. A critique of the present state of Chicana/o studies using a historical

context of MEChA’s activism is also demonstrated in this thesis. The thesis concludes

with reflections and some of the challenges that MEChA faces today.

1

Chapter One

Introduction

Introduction

Movimiento Estudiantíl Chicana/o de Aztlan, formed in 1969, has motivated

Chicanas/os to remain in school, graduate, and pursue higher levels of education. This

paper discusses the history of MEChA and its contributions to the enhancement and

empowerment of the Chicana/o community in Southern California from 1969 to 2010.

When MEChA first began it was not only concerned with the institutionalization

of Chicana/o studies, but it also produced activists who worked in the Chicana and

Chicano community. Many Chicanas/os developed their own agency, and that of the

Chicana/o community through their involvement in MEChA. In the process, the structure,

purpose, and guiding documents of MEChA will be reviewed. In this light the paper will

frame the role it continues to play on campuses and in the community. Given so much

information about the organization the paper will assess its continued importance and

why students should consider participating in the organization. Within the context the

significance of El Plan de Santa Barbara and El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan will be

analyzed as it pertains to the MEChA community today. My examination of MEChA

documents the history and significance of a Chicana/o organization that has tremendous

impact in the university and in the community. MEChA as a Chicana/o student

organization serves as one case study that showed it was possible for Chicanas and

Chicanos to reclaim their identity and acquire power in the political, educational, and

public arenas.

2

Noted by María Eva Valle, it is important to study the Chicana/o student activism

of the 1960s and 1970s so as to put into context what is going on with the Chicanas and

Chicanos of the early 1990s, society, and today. Not only does MEChA have a place in

the span of Chicana/o political history within California, but has reached a forty-one year

mark existing on campuses nationwide.1

In this chapter MEChA is introduced and the conditions that created this Chicana

and Chicano organization are discussed come together. The next section is a review of

the literature which will provide a framework that will narrate the Chicana and Chicano

student movements in the mid to late 1960s. Methods; the approaches to this thesis will

be described as well. The last section will give an overview of each chapter in this study.

Review of the Literature

This literature review uses a framework of student movements to show the

circumstances that MEChA was built around. The general themes within the literature

focus on Chicana and Chicano nationalism, Chicana feminism, and the Chicano/a anti-

Vietnam war movement. The salient research of Chicana and Chicano nationalist student

movements like MEChA were first conducted by Carlos Muñoz Jr., María Eva Valle, and

Roberto Tijerina Cantú.

Though Carlos Muñoz Jr. also shows the involvement of other Chicana/o

organizations in his research and does a comparative analysis between California and

Texas; he is arguably the first scholar to document MEChA extensively. María Eva Valle

is the first doctoral student to complete a study on the topic of MEChA from a California

1 María Eva Valle, “MEChA and The Transformation of Chicano Student Activism: Generational

Change, Conflict, and Continuity,” PhD diss., University of California, San Diego, 1996, 1-2, RobertoTijerina Cantú, MEChA Leadership Manual: History, Philosophy, And Organizational Strategy, Riverside,Coatzacoalco Publications, 2007, 537.

3

university, but her emphasis revolves around Mechistas2 in Arizona. Roberto Tijerina

Cantú’s work as mentioned above is the first book to be published on MEChA, in

California. Gustavo Licón’s dissertation focuses on MEChA in California.

In Muñoz’s Youth, Identity, Power: The Chicano Movement,3 the author noted

that by the mid 1980s MEChA was trying to use methods and approaches that had been

tailored to the 1960s. Though Chicanas and Chicanos had higher enrollment in the

university, younger Chicanas/os in the high school and junior high school systems still

remained at considerable drop out rates. MEChA at this point, more often than not, was

concentrating many of their efforts on campus rather than work outside of college

grounds. He also considered that even though Mechistas were no longer in the decade of

the 1960s, it did not mean that they had less zeal to work towards social progress for

Chicanas and Chicanos, nor did it make their oppressions any less real.4 Muñoz’s

analysis reveals the experience of a Chicana/o student movement in the Southern

Californian historical narrative of how problems of the Chicana/o may somewhat remain

the same, yet the conditions revolving those obstacles can be completely different or are

very likely to change. Muñoz reported that MEChA played a part in the development of

Chicana and Chicano student activism both in the university and in Chicano communities

at large. MEChA has influenced the curriculum for Chicanas and Chicanos and has many

times succeeded in improving the social conditions in the barrio. Muñoz has been

2 Mechistas is a reference for the MEChA membership and will be used throughout this work.

3 Carlos Muñoz Jr., Youth, Identity, Power: The Chicano Movement, London & New York, Verso,1989.

4 Carlos Muñoz Jr., Youth, Identity, Power: The Chicano Movement, 10th ed., London & NewYork, Verso, 2007, 219-220.

4

critiqued in this work for lacking a Chicana feminist analysis however in his later editions

of his book he has made efforts to correct these omissions.

María Eva Valle, the author adds to the study of MEChA in that her research cites

that once that Mechistas were to complete their educational endeavors, they would return

to the Chicana and Chicano community to push for social justice.5 Completing higher

education for the purpose of helping the Chicana and Chicano community is one of the

focal points that will be explored in this thesis.

Valle indicated that MEChA was one of the Chicana/o student activist groups that

founded Chicana/o studies and other programs on campus, and they worked on recruiting

Chicana/o students and staff members. MEChA were active agents in creating a space for

Chicano scholarship.6 The conclusions mentioned in Valle’s report of MEChA helping

establish Chicana and Chicano studies and its development; along with the hypothesis

that through MEChA, Chicanas and Chicanos had more decision making power over

their education. This supports the premises described in this thesis.

Tijerina Cantú discusses how MEChA’s most important mission was to make sure

that the Chicana/o community had access to college resources such as processing students

through admissions and helping them apply to financial aid in the university. Tijerina

Cantú reported that Chicana/o students were taught to speak publicly by having the

MEChA membership take turns facilitating meetings, give presentations, hosting an

event, coordinate activities, organize functions and meetings, and network with others.7

Tijerina Cantú reinforces the thesis of this study that Mechistas advocated for access to

5 Valle, 1996, 105-106, 160.

6 Valle, 1996, 64, 123, 150-151.

7 Tijerina Cantú, 2007, 23, 102.

5

the Chicana and Chicano community and that the members were given the opportunities

to learn leadership and organizational skills. In MEChA meetings at Pasadena City

College, for example, the membership’s board of coordinators rotated in chairing their

own meetings and for the general assembly on a weekly basis. These MEChA members

learned to organize by learning to facilitate meetings and became comfortable with

speaking in front of audiences, and by taking turns everyone was given a chance to gain

that experience. But, it was not only limited to conducting meetings, the members of

MEChA at PCC also participated in committee meetings in an array of different subjects

such as on campus activities, off campus activities, education and retention, history and

culture, community relations, Chicana topics, and Central and South American topics

which lead many times to putting together events, lectures, presentations, etc.8

Gustavo Licón’s dissertation “¡La Unión Hace La Fuerza! (Unity Creates

Strength!) M.E.Ch.A. And Chicana/o Student Activism in California, 1967-1999,” the

author discusses that MEChA members networked to one another within locales,

districts, and throughout the stretch of California by attending annual and biannual

conferences; but the organization has been able to balance general communication with

maintaining individual campus autonomy.9 Licón’s study supports the arguments put

forward in thesis that MEChA works not only at the campus level, but at the external

level as well in a logistical and organizational manner.

8 Movimiento Estudiantíl Chicano de Aztlan Pasadena City College Constitution, Pasadena City

College (1996). Author’s personal papers.

9 Gustavo Licón, “¡La Unión Hace La Fuerza! (Unity Creates Strength!) M.E.Ch.A. AndChicana/o Student Activism in California, 1967-1999,” PhD diss, University of Southern California, 2009,50.

6

The M.E.Ch.A. Manual: History, Philosophy, & Organizational Strategy by

Roberto Tijerina Cantú, the only published work (to date) where MEChA as an

organization is treated as the main focus of study.

It is important to note that graduate students on the campuses of the University of

California Berkeley and Arizona State University are currently writing their dissertations

about MEChA. There are two unpublished studies about MEChA, one by María Eva

Valle “MEChA and The Transformation of Chicano Student Activism: Generational

Change, Conflict, and Continuity” (Ph.D. diss., UC San Diego, 1996) and the second by

Gustavo Licón “¡La Unión Hace La Fuerza! (Unity Creates Strength!) M.E.Ch.A. And

Chicana/o Student Activism in California, 1967-1999” (Ph.D. diss., University of

Southern California, 2009).

Ernesto Chávez’s Mi Raza Primero! (My People First): Nationalism, Identity, and

Insurgency in the Chicano Movement in Los Angeles, 1966-1978, discusses how

Chicanas and Chicanos in the Los Angeles area were activists within the paradigm of

Chicano nationalism. Chávez indicated that the Brown Berets were Chicana and Chicano

activists who were dedicated to working in the Chicana/o community; with specific

issues such as police brutality.10 The author also highlighted the role of the Brown

Beret’s community involvement. For example, they opened a free clinic, and they were

instrumental to the Chicano anti-Vietnam war marches that the Chicano Moratorium had

organized.11 Chávez affirms that Chicana and Chicano groups such as the Brown Berets

and the Chicano Moratorium were individuals that helped inform the opinion of the

10 Ernesto Chávez, “¡Mi Raza Primero!”(My People First!): Nationalism, Identity, and

Insurgency in the Chicano Movement in Los Angeles, 1966-1978, Berkeley, University of California Press,2002, 49, 74-75.

11 Chávez, 2002, 55, 68.

7

MEChA membership in that the war against Vietnam was immoral; which will later be

discussed in this thesis.

Some of the first scholars to document and write about Chicana feminism in the

greater scheme of Chicana and Chicano history during the twentieth century and the

Chicana and Chicano movement were Alma García, et al., Vicki Ruíz, and Enriqueta

Vásquez.

The book Chicana Feminist Thought: The Basic Historical Writings, an

anthology of early primary documents on Chicana feminist scholarship of the late 1960s

to early 1970s, author Cynthia Orozco in her essay “Sexism in Chicano Studies and the

Community” found that while MEChA used racial, cultural, and educational

discrimination against Chicanos in order to address and organize for the Chicana and

Chicano community, as an entire organization, their comprehension of patriarchy was

deficient. The author emphasized that the membership had contested sexist approaches

towards Chicanas, but MEChA fell short in appreciating the larger conditions which

created the structures that placed women in subservient positions to men.12 Orozco fills in

the understanding of the Chicanas’ position within MEChA and the Chicana/o

movement. This essay helps emphasize the discussions of sexism in MEChA which will

be discussed later in this paper.

Vicki Ruíz’s From Out of the Shadows: Mexican Women in Twentieth-Century

America, Ruíz identified that many students of color who protested on university

campuses during the late 1960s were able to attain departments of ethnic studies. She also

discussed the different Chicana and Chicano students that were engaged in activities such

12 Cynthia Orozco, “Sexism in Chicano Studies and the Community” in Chicana Feminist

Thought: The Basic Historical Writings, ed. by Alma García (New York: Routledge, 1997), 268 (footnote4).

8

as setting up health clinics, fighting for immigrants, tutoring Chicana and Chicano

students, active against the war in Vietnam, and organizing food banks for the United

Farm Workers.13 According to Ruíz, other students of color influenced MEChA’s

activism.

Gabriela F. Arredondo, Aída Hurtado, Norma Klahn, Olga, Nájera-Ramírez, and

Patricia Zavella wrote and edited a significant collection on Chicana feminist scholarship

and Chicana student activism. Chicana Feminisms: A Critical Reader (Post-

Contemporary Interventions). In this work’s second chapter “Contested Histories: Las

Hijas de Cuauhtémoc, Chicana Feminisms, and Print Culture in the Chicano Movement,

1968-1973,” scholar, Maylei Blackwell documents the struggle of the Hijas de

Cuauhtémoc. Las Hijas de Cuahtémoc (HDC) was a Chicana student organization was

born out of Long Beach State College (now California State University Long Beach)

during 1968 to 1971. It was named Hijas de Cuauhtémoc to honor the Mexican feminist

organization (also named Hijas de Cuauhtémoc) that was active through the use of the

printing press during the Mexican Revolution 1910-1920. The beginnings of the group

came out of the United Mexican American Students (UMAS) in 1968 and then

Movimiento Estudiantíl Chicano de Aztlan (MEChA) in 1969-1971. The original

function of HDC within UMAS was to serve as a political information committee to the

female membership, but as the year passed and UMAS became MEChA, the Hijas’ level

of gender consciousness grew even further, eventually turning into an organization of its

own. Blackwell indicated how the Hijas’ rightfully criticized MEChA’s treating Chicanas

13 Vicki Ruíz, From Out Of The Shadows: Mexican Women in Twentieth-Century America, New

York, Oxford University Press, 1998, 105.

9

unequally and in sexist manners’ towards women.14 Blackwell provides the perspective

of the Chicana within MEChA during its initial years of the HDC organization. She

exposes through her examples the contributions of Chicanas within the Chicana and

Chicano movement during the 1960s with her study of the Hijas de Cuauhtémoc.

Blackwell shows how sexism occurred within the MEChA membership which will be

addressed in chapter three of this thesis.

Editors Lorena Oropeza and Dionne Espinoza of Enriqueta Vasquez and the

Chicano Movement: Writings From El Grito del Norte (2006), Vásquez contended in

“Teach True Values, Says La Raza Mother” that children need to be taught to develop

their self-agency so they could direct the curriculum they studied. She found that students

need to have an active part in their learning processes. The author argued that it is

fundamental to a child’s education that the learning materials be inclusive of diverse

cultures, this included Chicana and Chicano Studies.15 Vaquez’s analysis confirms the

importance of education that MEChA advocated for Chicana/o self and collective agency,

and that a relevant education is of utmost priority. More recently, terms such as active

participatory research have been used, but it should be noted that Enriqueta wrote of this

in 1968 where she was addressing the need of the student being a co-creator of their own

education; an activist-scholar ahead of her time.

The war against Vietnam is something that is imprinted in the minds of those who

lived during the late 1960s. Oropeza makes her case well of demonstrating the anti-war

14 Maylei Blackwell, “Contested Histories: Las Hijas de Cuauhtémoc, Chicana Feminisms, and

Print Culture in the Chicano Movement, 1968-1973,” in Chicana Feminisms: A Critical Reader, ed. byGabriela F. Arredondo, et al. (Durham: Duke University Press, 2004), 62, 68.

15 Enriqueta Longeaux y Vásquez, “Teach True Values, Says La Raza Mother,” in EnriquetaVasquez and the Chicano Movement: Writings from El Grito del Norte, ed. by Lorena Oropeza & DionneEspinoza (Houston: Arte Público Press, 2006), 33.

10

movement in the Chicana and Chicano community during this period. Oropeza’s ¡Raza

Si! Guerra No! Chicano Protest and Patriotism during the Viet Nam War Era (2005)

indicates that at the beginning of the Vietnam War in 1965, one of the first student

activists to protest against the war was the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee

(SNCC). At the New Mobe (an umbrella group during 1967 that was against the Vietnam

war), Dolores Huerta of the United Farm Workers (UFW), Rodolfo Gonzales of the

Crusade For Justice (CFJ), and Rosalio Muñoz of the National Chicano Moratorium

Committee (NCMC) were all present in organizing and speaking out against the war in

Vietnam.16 Furthermore, she pointed out another student activist group that was involved

at the time was the Student Mobilization Committee (SMC).17 The author complements

the topic of Chicana and Chicano participation against the war in Vietnam which will

also be discussed in this thesis.

George Mariscal’s research explores the activist Chicana and Chicano population

who were not strictly of Mexican descent within MEChA and in the Chicana/o

movement. In Brown-Eyed Children of The Sun: Lessons from the Chicano Movement,

1965-1975 written by George Mariscal, wrote about Chicana and Chicano activists who

were from a racially-mixed background, for example, Katarina Davis del Valle. An

activist in the Chicana and Chicano community during the late 1960s, her mother was

from Vera Cruz, México, and her father from Los Angeles, of African-American

ancestry. Davis del Valle was a vital participant during the anti-Vietnam war effort,

Black Student Union, and MEChA (including many other socially responsible

16 Lorena Oropeza, ¡Raza Si! ¡Guerra No! Chicano Protest and Patriotism during the Viet Nam

War Era, Berkeley, University of California Press, 2005, 128.

17 Oropeza, 2005, 223.

11

accomplishments as well).18 The participation of Chicanas and Chicanos of non-Mexican

descent within MEChA’s history, Mariscal’s findings not only adds knowledge to this

subject but bolsters the arguments for extending the Chicana/o identity to include those

who are not strictly of Mexican heritage.

It is important to stress the value of primary sources in order to evaluate history,

these were the origins of MEChA’s foundations; documents’ are part of the approaches

that will be used for evaluation in this paper.

Methods

The research is based on a historical textual analysis of documented accounts in

MEChA’s background, history, and philosophy in books (secondary sources) as well as

MEChA documents (primary sources). This thesis includes archival material from the

Rodolfo F. Acuña Collection and the El Popo Collection at California State University

Northridge are implemented. My own personal papers will also be used. Interviews of

two MEChA alumnae, one MEChA alumnus, and a current MEChA undergraduate.

This thesis provides an overview of the history of MEChA and its impact on the

retention of Chicana/o students in Southern California from 1969 to 2010. I will use

MEChA of Pasadena City College (PCC) and California State University Northridge

(CSUN) to inform my analysis, explore selected accomplishments of MEChA, but also

look at some of the limitations of over forty-one years of activism and the challenges that

MEChA faces in the 21st century.

The activities of various Chicano/a activist groups the Mexican American

Movement (MAM) of the 1930s for example; were the Mexican American Political

18 George Mariscal, Brown Eyed Children Of The Sun: Lessons from the Chicano Movement,

1965-1975, Albuquerque, University of New Mexico Press, 2005, 203-204.

12

Association (MAPA) beginning in 1959, Mexican American Youth Organization

(MAYO), and United Mexican American Students (UMAS) in 1967.19 MEChA was a

participant in the formation of Chicana/o studies in 1969. MEChA has retained to large

extents those departments at the university level through MEChA’s efforts. The

importance of conducting this study is to learn about what MEChA accomplished or lack

thereof. MEChA is an example of Chicana/o student resistance in Southern California.

The value of documenting MEChA’s history is to add to the existing body of research on

Chicana/o and Raza student activism that helped Chicana/o students who have completed

not only their college degrees, but have accomplished their professional endeavors to

help the Chicana and Chicano community. According to Armando Navarro, “of the

numerous student youth organizations that emerged, the following four played a critical

role in the Movimiento MAYO, UMAS, the Brown Berets, and MEChA.”20

In the second chapter Third World activism is discussed to reveal MEChA’s

influences and the context that MEChA was formed under. Second the origins of MEChA

will be noted explaining how it began. Equally important, there will be a historical

account of El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan and El Plan de Santa Barbara. These two

documents were instrumental in the formation of MEChA’s first years and continue to

help provide MEChA’s framework for its present state. The El Plan de Santa Barbara

conference that led to the formation of MEChA is introduced. El Plan de Santa Barbara

was an example and is a symbol of Chicana and Chicano community activism. The

19 Lorena Oropeza, “¡La Batalla Esta Aqui!: Chicanos Oppose The War in Vietnam,” PhD diss.,

Cornell University, 1996, viii-ix.

20 Armando Navarro, Mexicano Political Experience in Occupied Aztlán: Struggles and Change,Walnut Creek, Altamira Press, 2005, 367.

13

Vietnam War will also be presented as existing conditions that influenced anti-war

activism in the MEChA community during the 1960s.

In the third chapter this thesis explores MEChA’s principles. It will delve into

MEChA’s historical activities both in the community and university spheres. Next, the

foundations of how MEChA were based on will also be stated. The chapter continues

with the philosophical structure of MEChA that will make an inquiry of MEChA’s

philosophical stances from 1986 until 1999.

In the fourth chapter there will be an inspection of MEChA’s more current

participation with Chicana and Chicano studies. Second, MEChA will be examined for its

function as a base of educational support. Third, the topics discussing Raza of Non-

Mexican descent is addressed along with MEChA’s other different underpinnings;

revolving the issues of sexism and La Mujer in MEChA; and the Lesbian Gay Bisexual

Transgender In Question (LGBTIQ) Chicana and Chicano community through a

historical and textual analysis of MEChA’s Philosophy Papers. Next, the opponents of

Chicana/o studies, the immigrant, and MEChA will be analyzed. Finally, a reflection of

El Plan de Santa Barbara turning forty years and beyond will be weighed in on and the

present state of MEChA since El Plan de Santa Barbara’s inception.

Finally, the fifth chapter in this thesis will conclude with a summary of each

chapter discussed including personal reflections. The thesis will end by determining

whether or not the hypothesis of MEChA being an effective organizational and

educational tool for Chicanas and Chicanos to succeed in higher education is accurate.

14

Chapter Two

The social/political context of MEChA’s Founding

when one joins MEChA, one inherits its history, documents, literature, hopes,aspirations, failures, and even its spirit.

—Roberto Tijerina Cantú, MEChA Leadership Manual: History,Philosophy, & Organizational Strategy

Introduction

In 2010, MEChA reached forty-one years and had spread to high schools,

colleges, and university campuses nationwide.21 MEChA played an important role in the

history of Chicana/o student activism because it remained consistent in representing

Chicanas and Chicanos in both the university and the community.22 As a Chicana/o

student organization, it has yet to be examined. This chapter explores MEChA’s

formative influences. First, a discussion of Third World Spaces active during the 1960s

and their influence on MEChA organizers. Second, the First National Chicano Youth

Liberation Conference in Denver, Colorado and the drafting of El Plan Espiritual de

Aztlan. This discussion will include the role of sexism and El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan.

Third, the conference at the University of California Santa Barbara that produced El Plan

de Santa Barbara and also discusses sexism and El Plan de Santa Barbara. Lastly, the

chapter will discuss the various MEChA’s mottos and symbolism. Within this context,

the Anti-Vietnam War movement and the impressions it left on the Chicana and Chicano

21 María Eva Valle, “MEChA and The Transformation of Chicano Student Activism: Generational

Change, Conflict, and Continuity,” PhD diss., University of California, San Diego, 1996, 1-2, RobertoTijerina Cantú, MEChA Leadership Manual: History, Philosophy, And Organizational Strategy, Riverside,Coatzacoalco Publications, 2007, 537.

22 Ed Lerner, “MECHA involved on, off campus,” Daily Sundial, November 8, 1973, The RodolfoF. Acuña Collection, Chicana and Chicano Studies Department, Urban Archives Center, CSUN.

15

community will be discussed. This will be rounded off by a discussion of the National

Chicano Moratorium Committee as an example of the Chicana/o Anti-Vietnam War

movement in Southern California during the late 1960s.

MEChA and Third World Spaces

MEChA is one of the influential Chicana/o student organizations emerging in the

late 1960s. Despite the fact that Chicanas and Chicanos marginality, third world spaces,

MEChA allowed the possibility to resist their limitations and create a vehicle for change.

It was formed at a crucial period when Chicanas and Chicanos needed to organize as

students in their community to demand that their academic needs be met. Equally

important, they sought to assert their identity in a concrete and material manner.

MEChA was not an isolated movement.23 There was also activism in other third

world spaces. Third world spaces are zones where people of color who derive from

developing countries are in a continuous struggle for political and ideological sovereignty

against developed countries. Third world spaces can also mean people of color who live

within a developed nation and have similar socio-economic conditions as developing

nations, and who also fight for equality within a developed country. During the 1960s

into the mid 1970s MEChA germinated as a student organization in the midst of the

Cuban revolution, the Anti-Vietnam war movement, and civil rights activism. There were

influences of the Black Panthers in Oakland, the Young Lords in New York, and student

activists in Mexico City.24

23 There were other Chicana/o arenas of activism like Catolicos Por La Raza, the United Farm

Workers, La Raza Unida Party, Teatro Campesino, Chicano Press Association, Inside EastSide, El Gallo,and El Malcriado.

24 Elena Poniatowska, La noche de Tlatelolco, México, D.F., Ediciones Era, S.A. de C.V., 2006.

16

The Young Lords of New York and the Black Panthers of Northern California

adhered to similar tenets of self-determination and nationalism. A member of the Young

Lords named Woodrow Díaz opposed the war in Vietnam. Díaz was also critical of

capitalism and condemned both political parties of the U.S. government towards Puerto

Rico. Díaz advocated that Puerto Ricans and Chicanos build alliances with third world

countries.25 Most of the participants in the Mexico City student movements of 1968

exhibited a concern for third world alliances, by not only being concerned with Mexico,

but also in supporting the Cuban Revolution. These third world spaces helped give

perspective to Chicana/o organizations and their activism.

Origins of MEChA

El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan (EPEDA) was a compelling document that influenced

the Chicana/o community, across the nation. On March 29th-31st, 1969, the Crusade For

Justice (CFJ), a Chicana/o community group in Denver, Colorado organized the First

National Chicano Youth Leadership Conference held in the organization’s building in

Denver and produced El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan. The CFJ convened this conference to

discuss the present conditions of the Chicano people in this country. Their goal was also

to define and assert Chicano/a identity and self-determination within the United States.

Rodolfo “Corky” Gonzales,26 Alurista, Jorge González, Luis Valdez, Juan Gómez-

Quiñonez,27 Montezuma Esparza,28 are some of the writers that helped form El Plan

25 Lorena Oropeza, “¡La Batalla Esta Aqui!: Chicanos Oppose The War In Vietnam,” PhD diss.,

Cornell University, 1996, 253.

26 Rodolfo “Corky” Gonzales born 1928 in Denver Colorado. He was a boxer, poet, and apolitician. A visible activist and leader in the Chicana/o Movement. He passed away April 12th, 2005.

27 Jorge González, Interview, (1979), as cited in Carlos Muñoz Jr., Youth, Identity, Power: TheChicano Movement, 9th ed., London & New York, Verso, 2000, 97.

17

Espiritual de Aztlan. The contents of the plan were the result of the efforts and input from

the participants involved with the conference:

We are a bronze people with a bronze culture. Before the world, before all ofNorth America, before all our brothers in the bronze continent, we are a nation,we are a union of free pueblos, we are Aztlán.

El Plan commits all levels of Chicano society - the barrio, the campo, theranchero, the writer, the teacher, the worker, the professional - to La Causa.

EDUCATION must be relative to our people, i.e., history, culture, bilingualeducation, contributions, etc. Community control of our schools, our teachers, ouradministrators, our counselors, and our programs.

INSTITUTIONS shall serve our people by providing the service necessary for afull life and their welfare on the basis of restitution, not handouts or beggar'scrumbs. Restitution for past economic slavery, political exploitation, ethnic andcultural psychological destruction and denial of civil and human rights.Institutions in our community which do not serve the people have no place in thecommunity. The institutions belong to the people.29

Chicana and Chicano nationalism promotes the notion of self-determination in which

Chicanas and Chicanos decide what their education consist of, how they politically

organize, and how they ethnically identify themselves. Self-determination is the main

thrust in the El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan. This has caused some controversy amongst

some observers. The wording that causes the most controversy is “For la Raza todo,

Fuera de la Raza nada” as it only implies nationalist concerns. Yet as Jorge Mariscal

writes, [It] meant simply that their daily activities as Chicanos and Chicanas ought to

focus on how they were working to improve the life chances of their community.”30

28 Meier and Rivera, Mexican Americans, American Mexicans, 222, as cited in Armando Navarro,

Mexicano Political Experience in Occupied Aztlán: Struggles and Change, Walnut Creek, Altamira Press,2005, 339.

29 MEChA de Tejaztlan, “El Plan Espiritual de Aztlán,”http://studentorgs.utexas.edu/mecha/archive/plan.html (accessed May 20, 2010).

18

These critics forget or do not understand that within the very title of the Plan is the word

Espiritual (Spiritual) and this suggests that its context is not to be taken literally. I

contend this because its authors, like Corky Gonzales worked with other non-Chicano

groups. He worked with and supported others like the American Indian Movement

(AIM). Gonzales once said that “Human rights is a respect between two or more people,

two or more families and two or more nations . . . ”31 What he meant was that Chicana

and Chicano nationalism included learning about other cultures in order to learn about the

Chicana/o identity, embracing diversity would only make Chicana/o culture stronger.

Corky also spoke about having unity with African-Americans, Peruvians, and Puerto

Ricans.32 Another piece of evidence is that even those claiming to be Chicano nationalists

would work with non-Chicano movements in coalitions. Plan’s emphasis on nationalism

is only a part of MEChA’s quest for social justice. It can be postulated that Chicanas and

Chicanos probably did not realize how influential El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan’s emphasis

on nationalism would be later on. The National Chicano Youth Leadership Conference

participants felt that nationalism would unite the Chicano community. “Nationalism as

the key to organization transcends all religious, political, class, and economic factions or

boundaries. Nationalism is the common denominator that all members of La Raza can

agree upon.”33 Nationalism promoted unity within Chicana/o youth and instilled pride in

30 George Mariscal, Brown Eyed Children Of The Sun: Lessons from the Chicano Movement,

1965-1975, Albuquerque, University of New Mexico Press, 2005, 65.

31 Magdalena H. Beltran, “Corky and Jerry Gonzales speak at CSUN, urge unity for Chicanos,” ElPopo, Vol. 15, no. 2, December, 1980, El Popo Collection, Chicana and Chicano Studies Department,Urban Archives Center, CSUN.

32 Rodolfo F. Acuña, Foreword in Antonio Esquibel, (ed), Message to Aztlán: Selected Writings,Houston, Arte Público Press, (2001), xii-xiii, 37, 39, 53.

19

their cultural identity when American society did not. Nationalism motivated Chicanas

and Chicanos to feel they had a place in the world with the agency to improve conditions

they were experiencing in their communities.

The goals listed above in El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan became the framework that

was widely used in Chicana/o movement organizations like MEChA. While it was a good

start, it needed for the positions stated in El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan to be fleshed out

even further. El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan held positive feedback for the assessment of the

Chicana and Chicano community at the time. Alberto Heredia Urista, known as

“Alurista,” a Chicano poet, was the driving force behind El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan.

Sexism and El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan

In retrospect, critical analysis of the conference and El Plan did not address

discrimination against Chicanas. El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan reflected noticeable issues

concerning sexism in the movimiento. As Mariscal notes, “[t]he centrality of the terms

carnalismo and brotherhood in key documents such as the ‘Plan Espiritual de Aztlán’ left

the lasting impression that the future nation was to be for boys only, or at least it would

have to be based on the unequal relations of the traditional patriarchal family.”34 In 1969,

the issue of gender had not been discussed sufficiently among Chicano/a activists. Sonia

A. López in her essay “The Role Of The Chicana Within The Student Movement”

highlighted the sexism against Chicanas at the National Chicano Youth Liberation

Conference, she stated,

As early as Spring of 1969, at the Chicano Youth Conference held in Denver,Colorado, a few vocal Chicana activists raised the issue of the traditional role of

33 MEChA de Tejaztlan, “El Plan Espiritual de Aztlán,”

http://studentorgs.utexas.edu/mecha/archive/plan.html (accessed May 20, 2010), 1.

34 Mariscal, 63.

20

the Chicana in the Movement and how it limited her capabilities and herdevelopment. However, the majority of the Chicanas participating in theworkshop which discussed the role of the Chicana, did not feel the same. OneChicana observed that, ‘when the time came for the workshop to report to the fullconference, the only thing that the representative had to say was this. It was theconsensus of the group that the Chicana woman does not want to be liberated.’35

Although this did not represent the views of all Chicanas present, it would be safe to say

that the Chicana and Chicano movement in 1969 did not provide a safe space (both in

Denver like California) in which Chicanas could discuss gendered injustice aimed at

them as women. Not only was there sexism within the Chicano culture, but based on the

quote mentioned above, we can see that internalized sexism amongst women in the

movement was also evident.

There were also Chicanas who disagreed with the above proclamation. As a

response to the exclusion of Chicanas at the First National Chicano Youth Leadership

Conference in Denver, Colorado, Dionne Espinoza stated that “Enriqueta Longeaux y

Vasquez, a conference participant, responded to the statement made by the Chicana

Caucus in her groundbreaking article, The Woman of La Raza I.”36 Longeaux y Vasquez

wrote that while she belonged to the Chicana and Chicano community, she felt it unjust

to claim that “the Chicana does not want to be liberated.”37 Longeaux y Vasquez’s

background provided her a unique perspective. She occupied both traditional gender roles

35 Sonia A. López, “Essays on La Mujer” in Chicana Feminist Thought: The Basic Historical

Writings, ed. by Alma García (New York: Routledge, 1997), 16-29.

36 Dionne Espinoza, “Rethinking Cultural Nationalism and La Familia through Women’scommunities: Enriqueta Vasquez and Chicana Feminist Thought,” 205, Enriqueta Longeaux y Vasquez,“The Woman of La Raza, Part I,” 116, in Enriqueta Vasquez and the Chicano Movement Writings from ElGrito del Norte, ed. By Lorena Oropeza & Dionne Espinoza (Texas: Arte Público Press, 2006), MayleiBlackwell, “Contested Histories: Las Hijas de Cuauhtémoc, Chicana Feminisms, and Print Culture in theChicano Movement, 1968-1973,” in Chicana Feminisms: A Critical Reader, ed. by Gabriela F. Arredondo,et al. (Durham: Duke University Press, 2004), 72-73.

37 Ibid.

21

as a main wage earner and also responsible for domestic affairs such as caregiver.

Longeaux y Vasquez was active in the Chicano/a community despite living in poor

housing and facing other barriers. Longeaux y Vasquez was puzzled by the Chicana

workshop representative at the Denver conference, but at the same time she understood

that the majority of the Chicanas felt pressured by most of the Chicano males not to

contradict them.38 Her experience at Colorado, in addition to her experience in Chicana

activism subsequently led to her many writings on Chicana feminism as Longeaux y

Vasquez was also a regular contributor to the Chicana/o newspaper El Grito del Norte.

She became a major figure in the Chicano/a movement. Longeaux y Vasquez challenged

the mistreatment of Chicanas at a time when Chicana feminism was not a recognizable

term. Her work adds to the Chicanas who dared to defend women when it was not

popular to do so.

The First National Chicano Youth Liberation Conference discriminated against

Chicanas at the conference proceedings and on the document as a result of those

proceedings named El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan. Within the first four lines of EPEDA in

its opening poem it shows that Chicanas were not recognized, “the Chicano inhabitants

and civilizers of the northern land of Aztlán from whence came our forefathers,

reclaiming the land of their birth and consecrating the determination of our people of the

sun.” The tone of gender exclusion consisted in El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan. In the last

paragraph of the poem in EPEDA reads, “Brotherhood unites us, and love for our

38 Ibid.

22

brothers makes us a people whose time has come.” 39 Women and Chicanas were left out

of the aforementioned definition of what constituted people.

El Plan de Santa Barbara

El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan provided a catalyst for another important moment in

Chicana/o history and inspired a subsequent Chicana/o gathering in California’s central

region of 1969. The Chicano Coordinating Council on Higher Education organizing the

Santa Barbara conference in April, 1969 at University of California, Santa Barbara. El

Plan de Santa Barbara resulted in the formalization of Chicana/o studies and MEChA in

colleges and universities.

The Chicana/o youth and the community who came together in Denver, Colorado

created an educational plan of action which set the foundation for EPDSB. EPEDA set

the groundwork to address the challenges within the Chicana/o community, but EPDSB

would compliment that articulation by demanding that the negligence of Chicana and

Chicano education be stopped. In Armando B. Rendón’s chapter “No Future Without The

Young,” Rendón identified that in Los Angeles during the late 1960s there were problems

of Chicanos and Chicanas having under-enrollment at the university. Rendón also pointed

out that “within three and a half miles of California State College at Los Angeles [now

California State University Los Angeles], about 42,000 students of Mexican background

live, yet Cal State has a Chicano enrollment of less than 5 percent and its school of

education less than 1 percent.”40 Los Angeles Chicana/o students were one example of

39 MEChA de Tejaztlan, “El Plan Espiritual de Aztlán,”

http://studentorgs.utexas.edu/mecha/archive/plan.html (accessed May 20, 2010), 1.

23

how the university systems in Southern California were failing them by not recruiting

them into colleges, this only affirmed the need to make an educational plan such as El

Plan de Santa Barbara. René Núñez, a community activist41 came up with the idea of

holding a statewide conference under the auspices of CCCHE.42 The CCCHE stood for

the Chicano Coordinating Council on Higher Education, a Chicano organization during

the late 1960s that focused on the improvement of Chicanas and Chicanos in higher

education. The CCCHE can be credited with approaching Chicana/o student

organizations and the community to hold a conference that discussed the conditions of

Chicanas and Chicanos in colleges/universities during the late 1960s. One hundred

Chicanas/os that were part of community organizations participated in dialogue,

reflection, and documentation of the proceedings for Chicanas and Chicanos in higher

education. This would help Chicanas/os in their communities, and a guide that would

help them navigate through the university and college systems.43 Within El Plan de Santa

Barbara there are proposals that were used as models on how to attain and develop

Chicana/o studies, organize on campus, develop a Bachelor of Arts and Associate of Arts

program, and course outlines for history, political science, and sociology.44 Founding

40 Armando B. Rendón, Chicano Manifesto: The history and aspirations of the second largest

minority in America, Berkeley, Ollin and Associates, Inc., 1971, 189.

41 Rodolfo F. Acuña, e-mail message to author, February 12, 2008. René Núñez has just passedaway. Other contributors to El Plan de Santa Barbara that have departed are Frank Sandoval, Joe Serna,Rudy Tapia, Guillermo, and Ricardo Sais. (Lecture “40th Anniversary of El Plan de Santa Barbara,”University of California, Santa Barbara, May 23 2009).

42 René Núñez, interview, January 3, (1979) as cited in Carlos Muñoz Jr., Youth, Identity, Power:The Chicano Movement, 9th ed., London & New York, Verso, 2000, 135.

43 Muñoz, 136.

44 Chicano Coordinating Council on Higher Education, El Plan de Santa Bárbara: A ChicanoPlan for Higher Education, Table of Contents, Oakland, La Causa Publications, 1969.

24

Chicana and Chicano studies in universities was one of the important issues, but also was

finding a name that transformed and expressed their solidarity as a Chicana/o student

organization. One of the visible Chicana and Chicano organizations at the Santa Barbara

conference was the United Mexican American Students (UMAS).45 UMAS members

wanted to shift from the Mexican American identity to the Chicana and Chicano

identity.46 One name considered was “CAUSA” (Chicano Alliance for United Student

Action).47 Most of the Santa Barbara conference attendees felt that Movimiento

Estudiantíl Chicano de Aztlan was a good selection, “one of the reasons that MEChA was

chosen as the new name for our organization was because it was in Spanish.”48 Speaking

Spanish was considered a form of resistance since it was censored in high schools.

In April of 1969, during this three day conference, Chicana/o community based

organizations and Chicana/o student groups traveled to Santa Barbara at the Santa

Catalina dormitories (formerly the Francisco Torres),49 in order to discuss the situation of

education and Chicanas/os. Community groups such as the Chicano Center from

Berkeley, La Verdad from San Diego, Concilio of Marysville, Brown Berets from

45 Ernesto Chávez, “¡MiRaza Primero!”(My People First!): Nationalism, Identity, and Insurgency

in the Chicano Movement in Los Angeles, 1966-1978, Berkeley, University of California Press, 2002, 62.

46 Phil Missimore, “UMAS seeks unity in new name,” Daily Sundial, November 6, 1969, TheRodolfo F. Acuña Collection, Chicana and Chicano Studies Department, Urban Archives Center, CSUN.

47 Chicano Coordinating Council on Higher Education, El Plan de Santa Barbara: A ChicanoPlan for Higher Education, Organizing and Instituting Chicano Programs On Campus, Oakland, La CausaPublications, 1969, 22.

48 Mariana Marin (Lecture “40th Anniversary of El Plan de Santa Barbara,” University ofCalifornia, Santa Barbara, May 23 2009).

49 “Congreso The Official M.E.Ch.A. Chapter of U.C.S.B. El Congreso Our Story,” Congreso,http://orgs.sa.ucsb.edu/elcongreso/ourstory/ (accessed May 16, 2009). Francisco Torres is now called theSanta Catalina dormitories at U.C.S.B.

25

Sacramento, La Vida Nueva Newspaper, Community Service Center, and La Causa

Center50 came together at UC Santa Barbara to participate. Also included in the

conference participants were the members of Chicana/o student groups such as the United

Mexican American Students (UMAS) from University of California, Riverside;

University of California Santa Barbara; Long Beach, University of California, Davis;

East Los Angeles College; California State University, Los Angeles; University of

California, Irvine; joined with Mexican American Youth Alliance (MAYA) from

University of California, San Diego; San Diego State College; University of California,

Los Angeles; Loyola Marymount University; Marymount College; and the Mexican

American Student Confederation (MASC): Fresno State, University of California,

Berkeley,51 Mexican American Youth Organization (MAYO), and San Fernando Valley

State College, Mexican American Political Association (MAPA).

Two significant events were that they formulated El Plan de Santa Barbara which

called for the inception of Chicana/o studies programs statewide.52 Second, they created

MEChA (Movimiento Estudiantíl Chicana/o de Aztlan).53 Jesús Chavarría, one of the

original participants in writing El Plan de Santa Barbara’s54 foreword wrote about the

50 Chicano Coordinating Council on Higher Education, El Plan de Santa Barbara: A Chicano

Plan for Higher Education, Workshop Participants, Oakland, La Causa Publications, 1969, 84-90.

51 Ibid.

52 “Armando Valdez was the actual publisher on behalf of La Causa Publications for El Plan deSanta Barbara,” Gus Chavez, (Lecture “40th Anniversary of El Plan de Santa Barbara,” University ofCalifornia, Santa Barbara, May 23 2009).

53 Muñoz, 136.

54 Aside from Jesús Chavarría writing the manifesto, he proofread EPDSB along with Fernando deNecochea, Juan Gómez Quiñones, Paul Sánchez and Armando Valdez. Jesús Chavarría, interview, 27,(1980) as cited in Carlos Muñoz Jr., Youth, Identity, Power: The Chicano Movement, 9th ed., London &New York: Verso, 2000, 167-168.

26

importance of education being culturally and historically relevant to Chicanas and

Chicanos, he stated “We recognize that without a strategic use of education, an education

that places value on what we value, we will not realize our destiny.”55 Chavarría also

highlighted that the Chicana/o movement was larger than the student movement,

Chavarría makes his argument that different perspectives existed in the Chicana/o

community, he continued “ . . . El Plan de Santa Barbara, reflects one critical dimension

of the Chicano struggle.” 56 MEChA has always supported the idea of education being

relative in every aspect possible for Chicanas and Chicanos and other people of color.

And though MEChA’s main emphasis is education, as an organization it has many

dialogues and participates in different topics such as identity formation, politics, gender

issues, etc.

During a MEChA statewide conference a panel commemorating El Plan de Santa

Barbara’s fortieth anniversary at UC Santa Barbara, a panelist reflected how Chicanas’

were not given the sufficient acknowledgement they deserved for their contributions to

the making of EPDSB, Mariana Marin reflected, “most of the women were in the typing

pools where the original El Plan de Santa Barbara editions were typed out as there were

no word processors yet.”57 She also mentioned that “twelve percent of the women were

on the actual Steering Committee.”58 Nevertheless, the main points of El Plan de Santa

Barbara were Chicana and Chicano studies, recruiting and admitting Chicanas/os into the

55 Chicano Coordinating Council on Higher Education, El Plan de Santa Barbara: A Chicano

Plan for Higher Education, Manifesto, Oakland, La Causa Publications, 1969, 9-11.

56 Ibid.

57 Mariana Marin (Lecture “40th Anniversary of El Plan de Santa Barbara,” University ofCalifornia, Santa Barbara, May 23 2009).

58 Ibid.

27

university, support programs, political action for Chicanos/as, and organizing on and off

campus (including creating community centers).59 Chicanas and Chicanos that day

claimed their presence in higher education and actualized their collective and individual

agency.

Figure 1. El Plan de Santa Barbara, Cover

59 Chicano Coordinating Council on Higher Education, El Plan de Santa Barbara: A Chicano

Plan for Higher Education, Manifesto, Oakland, La Causa Publications, 1969, 9-11. EPDSB was soimportant that it helped organize Chicano prisoners. One example of EPDSB’s lasting strengths was during“the prison rebellion years in Leavenworth [Penitentiary in 1971-73], Chicanos in prison read El Plan deSanta Barbara and began to organize. They started their own plan and started a Chicano Studies class.”Alan Gómez (Lecture “40th Anniversary of El Plan de Santa Barbara,” University of California, SantaBarbara, May 23 2009).

28

On one of the original covers to El Plan de Santa Barbara, the Francisco Torres

(now the Santa Catalina dormitories) are set ablaze with fire at the top of its tower,

enveloped by smoke to its left. The building is also wrapped with two bullet straps

though to some this may seem violent, during the late 1960s many Chicana and Chicano

students felt they were not going to tolerate anymore discrimination. It was visually a

message that social change for Chicanas/os was very likely to occur, and that a transition

was happening from repression to empowerment.

Years later, El Plan de Santa Barbara and El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan would be

critiqued by Chicano scholars. George Mariscal, author of Brown Eyed Children of the

Sun Lessons from the Chicano Movement, 1965-1975 wrote the following,

Once we accept that neither the ‘Plan de Santa Barbara’ or the ‘Plan espiritual deAztlán’ will serve us as a blueprint for the present, we can begin to gleanimportant insights from the documents and adjust them for current conditions.60

Mariscal continues,

. . . framers of the ‘Plan’ were products of their particular moment. In therevolutionary atmosphere of 1969, the framers of the Plan could be relativelyconfident that the radical restructuring of the liberal university was underway andthat its complete transformation was a real possibility.61

While not totally revolutionary, El Plan de Santa Barbara was implemented as a guide for

community outreach by Chicana/o students and for the retention of Chicana and Chicano

studies on many college campuses throughout the U.S. The inclusion of Chicana and

Chicano studies along with other branches of Ethnic studies does not in fact constitute a

restructuring of the university. These documents are functional today, but need to be read

60 Mariscal, 50. See “The Relevance of Chicano Studies Today: El Plan de Santa Barbara

Revisited,” René Núñez, Raoul Contreras, Paper presented at the National Association of Chicano StudiesAnnual Conference, 1989, Ignacio García, Juncture in the Road: Chicano Studies Since El Plan De SantaBarbara, University of Arizona Press, 1996.

61 Ibid.

29

with a critical lens. They are bases from which we can work from. At the UC, Santa

Barbara conference there were also problems of sexism towards Chicanas as well.

Sexism and El Plan de Santa Barbara

Like in the National Chicano Youth Liberation Conference the month before, the

problem of sexism also existed in UC Santa Barbara that weekend. Anonymously, in a

written response, a Chicana tells her experience at the next CCCHE conference, which

was organized as a response to the Santa Barbara conference. She explains some

solutions as to how some of the Chicanas who attended the first El Plan de Santa Barbara

conference combated the sexism towards Chicanas during the El Plan de Santa Barbara

conference,

The CCHE (Chicano Committee on Higher Education) held in San Diego, March 19-20 [1970] was a historical policy-making weekend for the Chicana. The electrifyingatmosphere created by 19 state colleges assembling with the common objective ofstatewide unity came to a climax when it was unanimously resolved that El Plan deSanta Barbara (the bible of CCHE) and other higher education policy-makingorganizations) be revised to include the Chicana and her vital role in el movimiento.Equally important were the amendments that followed after Cal State Long Beach’sinitial motion which included:1. That no form of policy be made without adequate Chicana representation.2. That Chicanas be recruited into significant faculty and administrative positions.3. That all Chicano Studies Programs initiate and implement coursework on the

Chicana.4. That the cover of El Plan should recognize the Chicana and her movimiento

input.62

62 Anonymous, “CCHE Conference” in Chicana Feminist Thought: The Basic Historical Writings,

ed. by Alma García (New York: Routledge, 1997), 164-165, “ . . . the formation of a Chicana Caucus atthe 1970 Chicano Council in Higher Education (CCHE) meeting in San Diego . . . ,” See Blackwell, 2004,78. The different citations should be noted about the same organization being referred to. El Plan de SantaBarbara used “Chicano Coordinating Council on Higher Education,” the anonymous Chicana cited hererefers to it as “Chicano Committee on Higher Education,” and Blackwell called it the “Chicano Council inHigher Education.” For a discussion of these distinctions of the CCHE see Carlos Muñoz Jr., Youth,Identity, Power: The Chicano Movement, 10th ed., London & New York: Verso, 2007, 187.

30

When the mujeres at the conference who felt excluded at the first conference for Santa

Barbara Plan decided to have a conference of their own, they mobilized their power as

women and claimed participation in the movement.

El Plan de Santa Barbara was the foundational philosophy used by MEChA.

MEChA implemented El Plan de Santa Barbara by proposing Chicana and Chicano

studies at colleges and universities, and demanding from university administrators the

recruitment and admittance of more Chicana and Chicano students, and faculty/staff

MEChA provided orientation for incoming Chicana/o students, and developed

community centers in Chicana/o communities. With the exception of six campuses that

had already proposed Chicana and Chicano studies, and California State University,

Northridge which already had an approved program, El Plan de Santa Barbara like El

Plan Espiritual de Aztlan was fundamental in shaping MEChA’s direction.

MEChA’s Mottos and Symbolization

MEChA chose two primary mottos in 1969. The first was “La Union Hace La

Fuerza” meaning unity gives us strength, first coined in 1929 by La Alianza Americana, a

mutual aid society based in New Mexico.”63 Even though forty years had passed from the

time La Alianza used this adage it continued to reverberate into the late 1960s when

MEChA adopted it.

63 Eisenhower M.E.Ch.A, “M.E.Ch.A. Emblem,”

http://www.rialto.k12.ca.us/eisenhower/mecha/emblem.html (accessed January 8, 2009).

31

Figure 2. MEChA Eagle

MEChA approved the image of an eagle that carries a stick of dynamite in its left

claw, and a macahutil in its right claw.64 Macahuitl in the nahuatl language (one of the

primary indigenous languages spoken in historical and present day Meso-America), the

macahuitl, a weapon used in battle by the Mexicatl warrior, usually this club had sharp

blades made from black obsidian. This weapon is called Macana in Spanish, and club in

English. This symbol bears MEChA’s acronym at the top of a ribbon which surrounds the

entire eagle in mid flight with the words “La Union Hace La Fuerza” near the eagle’s tail.

The artist of the original MEChA eagle is for the most part unknown, however, it seems

to have been designed in 1969, though the description of the symbol cited here was

drafted and/or amended in 1998.65 One interpretation of using the club is to symbolize

MEChA’s will to fight for higher education and the Chicana and Chicano community just

as the Mexicatl warrior had used for battle. The dynamite held by the eagle could mean

that change was imminent, that social and educational revolution needed to happen now.

64 California Statewide M.E.Ch.A. Constitution, Amended at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo (1998).

Author’s personal papers.

65 Ibid.

32

The second motto of MEChA was “Por Mi Raza Habla El Espiritu,” which means

“For My People The Spirit Speaks.” Connected to this motto which will be detailed is a

symbol that was never formally approved by the MEChA membership even though it has

been argued that it was designed before the MEChA eagle.66

Figure 3. Cuauhtemoc Head

This other recognizable emblem of MEChA shows Cuauhtemoc, the last Mexica

ruler who fought against Cortéz and his Tlaxcalan allies in Mexico-Tenochtitlan. In the

MEChA Leadership Manual: History, Philosophy, And Organizational Strategy by

Roberto Tijerina Cantú, he described this slogan of MEChA, he stated that activist

scholar Roberto Sifuentes created the logo at the University of California Los Angeles

(UCLA) about 1969. “Por Mi Raza Habla El Espiritu” was an adaptation of “Por Mi Raza

66 Eisenhower M.E.Ch.A., “M.E.Ch.A. Emblem,”

http://www.rialto.k12.ca.us/eisenhower/mecha/emblem.html (accessed February 26, 2009).

33

Hablara El Espiritu” originally written by José Vasoncelos in his book La Raza Cosmica.

Roberto Sifuentes applied Vasconcelo’s statement to the present (late 1960s) and the

Chicana and Chicano movement. Tijerina Cantú asserts that Sifuentes drew the

Cuauhtemoc head when MEChA was still called UMAS (United Mexican American

Students), but after the conferences in Denver (El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan) and Santa

Barbara (El Plan de Santa Barbara), the acronym was changed from UMAS to MEChA.67

MEChA had begun to take on a life of its own with their mottos being established and

their logos having been designed.

Foundations of MEChA

One of the reasons that MEChA was formed was to ensure that Chicanas and

Chicanos received the same access and treatment in the university that other students of

more privileged backgrounds enjoyed. Chicana and Chicano students realized they had a

right to be treated like first class U.S. citizens. What is meant by first class U.S. citizens

is that all people are treated with the respect and rights as those who were considered

American (blond haired and blue eyed) in the late 1960s. During 1967, Mexican

American and African American students at California State University Los Angeles

formed university student organizations like the United Mexican American Students

(UMAS) and Black Student Association (BSA) at CSULA. These student organizations

brought public attention to the racism students of color received from university

administration. Originally called the “Minority Student Program,” (MSP) in response to a

lack of effort by the university administration and officials to make California State

University Los Angeles more diverse with students of color “[i]n April 1969, the

67 Roberto Tijerina Cantú, MEChA Leadership Manual: History, Philosophy, And Organizational

Strategy, Coatzacoalco Publications, 2007, 13.

34

California Legislature passed Senate Bill 1072 (the Harmer Bill) establishing the MSP at

the California state institutions of higher learning.”68 In 1969 this program would be

renamed the Educational Opportunity Program (EOP). The Educational Opportunity

Program (EOP) resulted from students of color advocating for other students of color to

be admitted into college. For example, at California State University Northridge (CSUN,

formerly San Fernando Valley State College) it offers programs that assist students with a

low-income background in the admissions process, helps high school students transition

into college, advises students through their faculty mentor program, and the EOP at

CSUN also supports students by providing grants and academic guidance.69 The purpose

of EOP was outreach to students who were academically neglected and were not

encouraged to attend four-year colleges or universities. This program also provided

academic support for students that needed tutoring in a specific subject. Once they were

admitted, EOP also helped with financial assistance to students who had low-income

backgrounds. The California legislature agreed with the Black Student Association and

United Mexican American Students at California State University Los Angeles, that

everyone must be afforded the same quality education, and the possibility to approach

higher education with ample opportunities. EOP was seen as being needed to provide

students of color access to higher education. The Educational Opportunity Program was

the brainchild of student activists and intellectuals to challenge the institution.

68 “History of EOP,” http://calstate.edu/sas/eop/various/history.shtml (accessed August 12th,

2010).

69 “History of Educational Opportunity Program,” http://www.csun.edu/eop/history_index.html(accessed March 25th, 2011).

35

Like EOP, UMAS also was helped to balance social justice.70 Ronald Reagan,

(then Governor of California) moved to cut it by June 30th, 1971.71 When Ronald Reagan

attempted to cut the Educational Opportunity Program, it was UMAS that defended EOP.

This was a time of consciousness in which students were getting involved in the

improvement of their college experience and the EOP Program is a testament to that

awareness.

Carlos Muñoz Jr. in his book Youth, Identity, Power: The Chicano Movement he

wrote who had suggested MEChA as the name for the Chicano/a student organization, he

had written that “in 1969, [t]he name MEChA was proposed by [student,] Ysidro Ramón

Macías.” George Mariscal in Brown Eyed Children Of The Sun: Lessons from the

Chicano Movement, 1965-1975 also details some of the history behind the naming of

MEChA, he identified that “Macías was a key member of the Third World Liberation

Front Strike at UC Berkeley, and was clubbed unconscious by police on February 26,

1969. He was also a member of Teatro Campesino and reportedly the originator of the

name Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán (MEChA) at the Santa Barbara

70 Gustavo Licón (Lecture, California State University Northridge, April 17 2008). “The

Educational Opportunities Program (E.O.P.) at San Fernando Valley State College [now CSUN] beganwith the formal admission of 222 minority students in September, 1968,” “EOP benefits ChicanoStudents,” El Popo, Vol. 1, no.1, March 10, 1970, El Popo Collection, Chicana and Chicano StudiesDepartment, Urban Archives Center, CSUN.

71 “EOP IN DANGER EDUCACION EN PELIGRO,” “EOP LETTER CAMPAIGN,” El Popo,Vol. 3, no. 2, 1971, “Editorial, Reagan sets out to force us OUT OF COLLEGE…again!!!,” El Popo, Vol.4, no. 3, 1972-1973, El Popo Collection, Chicana and Chicano Studies Department, Urban Archives Center,CSUN, Joel Malinak, “EOP fights budget cuts,” Daily Sundial, March 12, 1971, “EOP bill considered,”Daily Sundial, March 26, 1971, “MECHA letters urge EOP reinstatement,” Daily Sundial, March 30, 1971,“MECHA protests EOP cuts; class boycott, march planned,” Daily Sundial, April 12, 1972, The Rodolfo F.Acuña Collection, Chicana and Chicano Studies Department, Urban Archives Center, CSUN, ErnestoChávez, “¡MiRaza Primero!”(My People First!): Nationalism, Identity, and Insurgency in the ChicanoMovement in Los Angeles, 1966-1978, Berkeley, University of California Press, 2002, 77.

36

Conference.”72 MEChA formed in April of 1969 and was based in central California. Its

core issues were to elect more Chicano politicians, struggling for education by getting

Chicanas/os admitted into college, giving workshops about Chicana/o history to promote

the Chicana and Chicano identity, and land grant issues such as supporting Reies Lopez

Tijerina who advocated to have honored the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo of 1848. The

war in Vietnam will now be considered as one of the additional influences on the

formation of MEChA.

The Vietnam War

Amidst the student activism the Vietnam War waged its own warfare on the

Chicano communities. Like in previous wars Chicanos during the 1960s were fighting for

the United States Army. It was difficult for Chicano soldiers because they felt there was a

need to protect the country. During the draft, if the soldiers returned from combat they

still faced discrimination aimed at Chicanas/os, Blacks, and other people of color.

Mechistas at California State University Northridge (CSUN) expressed their views

against the war in Vietnam in a student run Chicana/o newspaper from CSUN named El

Popo, Chicana and Chicano students were critical of the media and federal administration

at the time of the war towards Chicanos, a Mechista in El Popo wrote “ . . . The

established press and government are totally insensitive to the aspirations of Chicanos

and couldn’t care less if they live or die - - here or in Vietnam.” The author continued,

“Why should Chicanos fight in order to remain slaves at home?” 73 George Mariscal in

72 Carlos Muñoz Jr., Youth, Identity, Power: The Chicano Movement, 9th ed., London & New

York, Verso, 2000, 97, George Mariscal, Brown-Eyed Children Of The Sun: Lessons from the ChicanoMovement, 1965-1975, Albuquerque, University of New Mexico Press, 2005, 281 (footnote 14).

73 “Chicano Moratorium ¡Raza Si! Vietnam No!, El Popo, Vol. 1, no. 1, March 10, 1970, El PopoCollection, Chicana and Chicano Studies Department, Urban Archives Center, CSUN.

37

his book that he edited Aztlán and Viet Nam: Chicano and Chicana Experiences of the

War, Mariscal brought attention that some Chicanos during the Vietnam War were given

rifles that didn’t work.74 He also presented evidence that the U.S. military sent in its

soldiers without any intelligence on enemy locations.75 Mariscal mentioned a Chicano

soldier who got hurt did not receive medical attention for eight hours. Because of poor

treatment from his first doctor, the soldier had to have another doctor look at him again,

but only after an unreasonable amount of time.76 Chicanos who were in trouble with the

law were coerced into going to the army.77 The Chicanos who were fortunate enough to

return home safely to a life of war hysteria, flashbacks, and most had a difficult time

readjusting to civilian life.78 Many also returned in a state of psychological disturbance,

or were physically maimed. Often the loyalty of Chicano war veterans was questioned.

The following account is an example of discrimination faced by Chicano war veterans

according to Charley Trujillo who wrote Dogs From Illusion and Soldados: Chicanos in

Vietnam Narratives of the Vietnam War. Ese, Chuco, and Machete were Chicanos, U.S.

citizens, veterans of Vietnam, but because they had brown skin and were working in the

sugar beet fields they were harassed by border patrol agents, they were left in dismay

because not only were they citizens but they were war veterans, unfortunately, they were

treated as neither by the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) now referred to as

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Trujillo reports this incident:

74 George Mariscal, (ed), Aztlán and Viet Nam: Chicano And Chicana Experiences of the War,

Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1999, 147.

75 Ibid.

76 Ibid, 149.

77 Ibid, 151.

78 Ibid, 155.

38

‘Where were you born?’ asks one agent with disdain.‘Fuck you,’ he answers, pissed off.‘What did you say?’ asks the other agent, enraged and astonished that a Mexicanwould talk back to them like that.‘I said fuck you. Can’t you understand Eng—’ But before Ese can finish hissentence or set himself to fight back, the agents assault and begin to hit withmacanas [billy clubs].79

American society purported the message that if one went to fight in the Vietnam War one

would be accepted and treated with respect as an American. As Trujillo had said, these

Chicanos did serve in the war, came back, and were treated as if they were not citizens.

As a result Chicana/o students and the community began to protest the war in Vietnam.

Chicanos and Chicanas began to realize that they were defending a nation that

gave them little acknowledgement as a people and treated them unjustly.80 New

Chicana/o community organizations began to emerge: the Southwest Council of La Raza

[now National Council of La Raza], MALDEF (Mexican American Legal Defense

Education Fund, and CASA-HGT (Centro de Acción Social Autonóma-Hermandad

General de Trabajadores).81 The National Chicano Moratorium Committee in the late

1960s to early 1970s was a good example of that. During this time it awakened many in

the Chicana/o community to what was happening in the war against Vietnam, inspiring

Chicanas and Chicanos to become involved in their community by being vocal and

visibly organized towards stopping the occupation of Vietnam. Many who were active in

this movement also became participants in MEChA’s goals of getting more of the

79 Charley B. Trujillo, Dogs From Illusion, San José, Chusma House Publications, 1994,199,

Charley B. Trujillo, Soldados: Chicanos in Vietnam Narratives of the Vietnam War, Sunnyvale, Patson’sPress, 2000.

80 Rodolfo F. Acuña, Occupied America: A History of Chicanos, 5th ed., New York, PearsonLongman, 2004, 418.

81 Armando Navarro, Mexicano Political Experience in Occupied Aztlán: Struggles and Change,Walnut Creek, Altamira Press, 2005, 337.

39

Chicana/o community into the university. The National Chicano Moratorium Committee

is evidence of Chicana/o participation against the war during the Vietnam era.

National Chicano Moratorium Committee

The National Chicano Moratorium was organized by a Chicana/o grassroots

organization named the Brown Berets of Aztlan. They put together a protest in which

2000 demonstrators attended on December 20, 1969 eight months after EPDSB.82 “By

late 1969, the [Brown] Berets joined the anti-war protest by holding two marches and

rallies. [David] Sanchéz, joined by Rosalio Muñoz in 1970 formed the National Chicano

Moratorium Committee (NCMC). On August 29, they staged the largest Chicano antiwar

march and rally involving some thirty thousand people in Los Angeles.83

Chicanas/os organized against the war to end repression of Chicanos who were

being pushed to the front lines of Vietnam instead of the university classrooms. As

people entered the 1960s the war was an eye opener for the general public. A critique of

American society was direct at times, it was able to assess where as a country it was

heading. Unfortunately, Chicanas and Chicanos continue to be one of the largest ethnic

groups still recruited today into the army.84

82 Rodolfo F. Acuña, Occupied America: A History of Chicanos, 4th ed., New York, Addison

Wesley, 2000, 377.

83 Navarro, 373.

84 MEChA, “Military Targets Chicanas/os Students,” El Popo, no. 1, Spring 2006, El PopoCollection, Chicana and Chicano Studies Department, Urban Archives Center, CSUN, “Army’s HispanicAccess Initiative still draws some campus criticism,” Daily Sundial, November 17, 2005,http://sundial.csun.edu/2005/11/armyshispanicaccessinitiativestilldrawssomecampuscriticism/, (accessedSeptember 16, 2010), Melanie Sax, “Protestors rally against Iraq war,” Daily Sundial, March 23, 2007,http://sundial.csun.edu/2007/03/protestersrallyagainstiraqwar/, (accessed September 16, 2010).

40

Conclusion

MEChA has maintained their mission, to keep Chicanas and Chicanos in higher

education for forty-one years. Third world spaces, like the Young Lords of New York,

and the Black Panthers of Oakland, were some of the movements that influenced MEChA

to participate in the civil rights movement. Also included are the students in Tlatelolco,

Mexico City, Mexico. These examples and other global south movements were crucial in

informing MEChA’s desire for social change. El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan and El Plan de

Santa Barbara in 1969 were the original cornerstones of Chicana and Chicano studies and

MEChA. MEChA’s mottos and symbolization gave their membership symbolic and

visual goals, to aim for the development and future of their organization.

UMAS/MEChA’s foundations in the late 1960s helped establish the presence of more

Chicanas and Chicanos on campus including the development of the Educational

Opportunity Program. With the upsurge of the Vietnam War students and members of the

community mobilized protests and marches to show the general public their moral

outrage of the murdering of innocent lives, both on the side of Vietnam and the United

States. Chicana/o organizations like the National Chicano Moratorium Committee and

the Brown Berets of Aztlan who were some of the key participants that spearheaded these

efforts in the Chicana/o community.

41

Chapter Three

The organizational growth and revisions of MEChA

To some of us MEChA is a passion.

—Roberto Tijerina Cantú, MEChA Leadership Manual: History,Philosophy, & Organizational Strategy

Introduction

This chapter will examine MEChA’s initial goals and the evolution of the chapter,

county, region, state, and national level organization. Also examined are MEChA’s

position papers and what would become the philosophy of MEChA is also documented.

Discussed is MEChA’s positions as chronicled in the philosophy of MEChA, which

includes topics such as members of non-Mexican descent, and the Lesbian, Gay,

Bisexual, Transgender, In Question as it relates to the Chicana and Chicano community.

The chapter addresses gender discrimination in MEChA during its developmental phase.

Once MEChA became a formal organization, it evolved through stages of re-evaluation

and change. The impact of MEChA will be included describing the positive effects it had

on two Chicanas who were involved in the Chicana/o organization and the movement.

MEChA became a Chicana/o student organization in the late 1960s; however

Chicanas and Chicanos already had a long history of resistance. After the stock market

crash of 1929, the Mexican Chamber of Commerce spoke out against the mass

deportations of Mexicans and Mexican Americans by immigration authorities.

Spontaneous arrests disrupted the Chicano community in Los Angeles because they were

causing Mexicans and Chicanos to lose their employment and accessibility to purchase

42

food at markets.85 During these hard economic times, Mexicans transitioned from

migratory farm workers to working in urban settings, such as Los Angeles.86 Once

unemployment hit the barrio in the east side of Los Angeles, women like María Olazábal

helped unemployed Mexicans by selling tamales at very low prices. She, along with other

women of the Belvedere area formed the Cooperative Society of Unemployed Mexican

Ladies (CSUML).87 At the beginning of the repatriation period in Los Angeles many

Mexicans left, however towards the end of the deportation campaign, Mexicans and

Chicanos refused to go to Mexico in spite of the harsh economic conditions they faced in

the U.S. Heading into the 1930s and 1940s Chicanos and Chicanas integrated themselves

as activists into trade unions.88 In Lemon Grove, San Diego, California, Mexicans

challenged the decision of Lemon Grove School Board of Education to segregate

Mexican children so as to not impede the “progress” of American children in the 1930s.89

The schools in Westminster, California followed a similar pattern, prompting Mendez vs.

Westminster that challenged the segregation of Mexican children.90

Organizational growth of MEChA

In an e-mail correspondence, Rodolfo F. Acuña talks about one of the co-editors

of El Plan de Santa Barbara and suggested the models he thought MEChA should use to

85 George J. Sánchez, Becoming Mexican American: Ethnicity, Culture, and Identity in Chicano

Los Angeles, 1900-1945 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), ACLS Humanities E-Book, 123.

86 Sánchez, 189.

87 Sánchez, 209.

88 Sánchez, 227-234, 240.

89 Robert R. Alvarez Jr., “The Lemon Grove Incident: The Nation’s First SuccessfulDesegregation Court Case,” Journal of San Diego History 32, no. 2 (Spring 1986).

90 Matsuda Michael, Sandra Robbie, and Eleazar Martinez, Mendez Vs. Westminster: For All theChildren: the Story of an American Civil Rights Victory, Yorba Linda, Blue State Press, 2006.

43

develop itself as an organization, he stated that “Juan Gómez Quiñones wanted to pattern

it [MEChA] after the Magónistas and its Focos.”91 Magónistas can be traced back to the

early twentieth century, when Ricardo Flores Magón and Enrique Flores Magón, two

Mexican revolutionaries organized against Porfirio Díaz. The Magónistas followed the

beliefs of the Magón brothers. Focos are small groups within a larger organization that

have their specific tasks or goals that coordinate with the overall organization or group to

attain similar ends. From examining the El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan and El Plan de Santa

Barbara I could not find any direct influence of these paradigms; because neither EPEDA

or EPDSB contain any language connected to Magonism or Foquismo.

As time progressed MEChA established campus chapters that facilitated meetings

and held events on issues involving the local community, education, politics, cultural &

social issues. MEChA developed Centrales that organized county structures to coordinate

the chapters. In California, MEChA established itself into three regions, the north,

central, and the southern regions. Within each region the following counties are located:92

1) Northern-(Del Norte, Siskiyou, Moodoo to San Mateo, Santa Clara, Alameda,San Joaquin, Calaveras, and Alpine)2) Central-(Santa Cruz, San Benito, Stanislaus, Tuolomine, and Mono to SantaBarbara and Kern)3) Southern-(Ventura, Los Angeles, San Bernardino to San Diego, and ImperialValley).

The conferences were a valuable tool in keeping the members connected with one

another. The MEChA statewide coordinates and makes the final decisions on behalf of

their MEChA chapters. The statewide committee decides on the themes of the conference

91 Rodolfo F. Acuña, e-mail message to author, (February 12, 2008).

92 California Statewide M.E.Ch.A. Constitution, Amended at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo (1998).Author’s personal papers.

44

program, its itinerary, goals and objectives of the conference, keynote speakers, caucuses,

workshops, vendors, housing, registration, security, entertainment, and food. The

statewide liaison process must have at least three meetings: one in the northern region,

central, and the southern, the last meeting in the region where the MEChA statewide

conference is to take place. Statewide MEChA elects two chairs for the conference,

preferably a female and a male, to have equal representation (not necessarily authority)

throughout the entire statewide process.

There are two yearly California statewide conferences (known originally as

Summits), during the fall and spring semesters in which the regions will rotate as the

hosting campus. Most chapters get funds to hold statewide conference through

fundraising on and off campus like selling tamales or having benefit concerts, etc. The

rest is paid with statewide conference registration fees. A chapter is usually responsible

for hosting the conference: more recently chapters have collaborated with their respective

region and county to coordinate and share the responsibilities.

Typically, a California MEChA statewide conference takes place over a weekend

(Friday, Saturday, and Sunday). On Friday evening, the first day of the conference,

registration, training for facilitators, and cultural entertainment “Noche de Cultura” or

“Flor y Canto” takes place. On Saturday, the host committee welcomes MEChA

campuses and statewide chairs. Next, gender caucuses gather and focus on topics of

gender. After the gender caucuses, there are a series of workshops. Caucuses concentrate

on issues regional priorities, and the day concludes with dinner and entertainment. On

Sunday, various caucuses address middle school, high school, junior colleges, public and

private universities and meet to discuss problems or situations they feel need to be

45

brought to the attention of statewide MEChA. Lastly, all of the statewide conference

participants meet at one location at the hosting campus to share, reflect, and critique the

outcomes of the conference. This is called the “Resolution Circle,” and finishes with the

bid for a MEChA chapter to host the next MEChA statewide conference. This tends to be

the general format that has evolved over time and every semester it tends to add

something different. The majority of the conference participants are MEChA members

with a smaller percentage of community members and other organizations participating.

Not until 1994, did MEChA form a national structure93 composed of ten regions

which are:

1) Alta Califas Sur (Southern California)2) Alta Califas Norte (Northern California)3) Centro Califaztlan94 (Central California)4) Pacific Northwest5) Mictlampa Cihuatlampa (North West)6) Calpulli Montañas del Norte (Homes of the North Mountains)7) South East Tejaztlan (South East Texas)8) Centro Aztlan (Mid-States)9) Tierra Mid-Atl (Land of the Mid-Water)10) Este Aztlan (East Coast)

These regions meet once a year at the annual national conference to network, dialogue,

and meet with the intent to create a plan of action for current national pressing issues in

the Chicana/o and Raza communities.

The MEChA national liaison is the deciding body that coordinates and makes the

final decisions on behalf of their respective states as to the structure and content of the

national MEChA conference. In regards to the logistical decisions that the MEChA

93 National M.E.Ch.A. Constitution, Amended March 18, at San Diego State University (2001).Author’s personal papers.

94 Aztlan, land of herons. Aztlan is of great discussion. Schools of thought range from where itsphysical location exists, philosophical stances, to political views. Aztlan here is defined as a geographicalplace. The Nahuatl terms explained here are translations and not transliterations. Spanish and Nahuatl termswere translated to English.

46

national liaison must make, they are virtually the same as California MEChA statewide

with the difference that the MEChA national conference is yearly and begins on

Thursday evening. The national liaison committee has at least three meetings, one in a

different state as chosen by the National MEChA Coordinating Council (NMCC), the

NMCC are the coordinating body that is nominated and elected to represent the MEChA

chapter from their specific states. National MEChA elects two chairs for the conference,

preferably a female and a male that have equal representation throughout the entire

national process.95 The MEChA national takes place once a year during the spring.

Philosophy of MEChA

As a Chicana and Chicano student organization MEChA prioritized what their

philosophical tenets changes occurred. Besides El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan and El Plan

de Santa Barbara were its guiding principles. In 1973, at the University of California

Riverside there was a summit, approximately 1,500 Chicanas and Chicanos attended.

Groups like the Communist Workers Party (CWP) and the Socialist Workers Party

(SWP) also appeared at this meeting. There were clashes over ideological direction of

nationalism versus internationalism. The attendees of this conference did not reach a

common vision for improvement of the Chicana/o community.

This would foreshadow later attempts by the League of Revolutionary Struggle to

remove MEChA leadership that promoted nationalist ideals from the organization. In the

late 1970s, the organization named the League of Revolutionary Struggle (LRS) formed.

The League of Revolutionary Struggle was originally the labor committee of La Raza

95 Gustavo Licón, “¡La Unión Hace La Fuerza! (Unity Creates Strength!) M.E.Ch.A. And

Chicana/o Student Activism in California, 1967-1999,” PhD diss, University of Southern California, 2009,89.

47

Unida Party which became a faction and splintered into its own group. It was a group

informed by Marxist-Leninist and Mao teaching. The LRS was an organization that

functioned at the national level, their membership was rarely transparent, they ran a

newspaper, but their overall end was to “overthrow the country.”96

Chicano nationalism promoted the belief of being proud of the cultural identity

and history of the Chicana and Chicano. Chicano nationalism was to make self-reliance a

reality by depending less on society for social and racial validation. MEChA wanted to

discuss history and culture, while the focus of LRS was mainly class issues. By the mid

1980s there was a heavy “infiltration by the League of Revolutionary Struggle (LRS)” or

referred to by Mechistas as “Liga,” where MEChA members were being encouraged to

leave their chapters to join the LRS, this was even more visible in California.97 In the

MEChA Leadership Manual: History, Philosophy, And Organizational Strategy, Tijerina

Cantú wrote that MEChA from the University of California Riverside took action to

counteract measures posed by Liga by having MEChA write their stances on MEChA’s

ideology—Chicana and Chicano nationalism.98 In a hand out, MEChA at UCLA narrated

how MEChA responded to LRS’s attacks, and how it had sat down to write a set of

documents that was known as M.E.Ch.A.’s Position Papers.99 The nationalists in MEChA

retaliated against the LRS and this along with other factors furthered the deterioration of

Liga as an organization. In 1985 during the fall semester, the LRS offered to

96 Gustavo Licón (Lecture, California State University Northridge, April 17 2008).

97 M.E.Ch.A. de U.C.L.A., Handout, “Movimiento Estudiantíl Chicano de Aztlan 101,” Fall(2000). Author’s personal papers.

98 Ibid, Roberto Tijerina Cantú, MEChA Leadership Manual: History, Philosophy, AndOrganizational Strategy, Coatzacoalco Publications, 2007, 618.

99 M.E.Ch.A. de U.C.L.A., Handout, “Movimiento Estudiantíl Chicano de Aztlan 101,” Fall(2000). Author’s personal papers.

48

accommodate a statewide conference at California State University Northridge in which

all of the workshops did not have a Chicana/o nationalist foundation. Many of the

participants felt conflicted as some were nationalists. During that semester in December

of 1985 another conference at the regional level was hosted by the California State

University Fullerton and University of California Irvine MEChA’s, all of the speakers

and workshops had been decided upon and approved. Right before the conference, the

LRS changed the workshops. In 1986 at a national conference hosted by MEChA at the

University of California Berkeley, the LRS became the conference itself. The Liga

targeted chapters that were nationalist in orientation. MEChA nationalists were

strategically housed farther from the conference than non-nationalist chapters. Colorado

was housed fifteen miles away, Texas was placed thirty miles apart, and according to

Tijerna Cantú “the delegation from Southern California was put in the basement of a gym

with no heater or lights.”100

In a lecture, Gustavo Licón stated that “the northern chapters were more likely to

be supportive of Liga than the southern chapters.”101 In 1989 with the collapse of the

Soviet Union102 and the falling of the Berlin wall, these factors caused tensions within the

League of Revolutionary struggle.103 This along with the formal approval of MEChA’s

Position Papers throughout California contributed to the demise of Liga’s direct and

indirect involvement in MEChA.

100 Tijerina Cantú, 615-616.

101 Gustavo Licón (Lecture, California State University Northridge, April 17 2008).

102 Ibid.

103 Gustavo Licón, “¡La Unión Hace La Fuerza! (Unity Creates Strength!) M.E.Ch.A. AndChicana/o Student Activism in California, 1967-1999,” PhD diss, University of Southern California, 2009,3.

49

Initially, M.E.Ch.A.’s Position Papers were divided into four sections:

Philosophy, Structure, Goals and Objectives, and Relationship to Outside Organizations.

The Philosophy section mentions that MEChA was formed from El Plan de Santa

Barbara and El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan, emphasizing the importance of self-reliance as

Chicanos. The Structure, Goals and Objectives details how MEChA had a framework of

logistical operations and how it functions on campus as a chapter, county (e.g., Los

Angeles, Orange County), region (northern, central, southern), as a state, nationally.

Relationship to Outside Organizations discusses that when working with other groups

other than MEChA, MEChA must be cautious and make sure that its principles will not

be compromised. The League of Revolutionary Struggle was an example and MEChA

exercised caution when working with other coalitions.

MEChA believed that through Chicana/o nationalism and higher education the

Chicana/o community would empower itself. An advantage of Chicana and Chicano

nationalism is that it improves the self-esteem of the individual and group through

cultural and historical pride. Chicano nationalism also instills the idea of self and

collective agency, making their thinking more independent from the dominant culture.

Some disadvantages are that it has at times excluded Raza that is not of Mexican descent,

and the paradigm within Chicano nationalism has also left the Chicanas’ voice out of the

discussion. It is important to note that during the 1960s the idea of Chicana and Chicano

nationalism was presented as essentialist, a set of concepts and ideas that were

demarcated to be one clear cut idea. There was no room for variances. In prior literature

regarding Chicano nationalism, it is the tendency for Chicano nationalism to be

interpreted as being exclusive. In chapter 2, the discussion of activist Rodolfo “Corky”

50

Gonzales was described as being inclusive of other people besides Chicanas and

Chicanos. Some scholars can interpret Corky Gonzales as someone who would identify

as an internationalist, his work in the Chicana and Chicano community suggested his

being a nationalist. Although much more complex, Corky was not the type of Chicano

nationalist that has been previously described as exclusionary. In his speeches, work, and

writings he emphasized the Chicana and Chicano cultural identity. MEChA’s Position

Papers re-emphasized that education has gotten worse for the Chicana and Chicano

student since 1969, attacks against immigrants continued, affirmative action and civil

liberties further deteriorated. MEChA rejected the labeling of Chicanos/as as Hispanics

and reaffirmed Chicano/a self-determination. A very important point that is stated in the

philosophy of MEChA is the Chicana and Chicano identity. MEChA posited that

identifying as a Chicana or Chicano is a decision a person must make on their own and

that this process of ascribing as a Chicana/o comes from personal and gradual

development. MEChA declared solidarity with their indigenous sisters and brothers of the

northern Native peoples. MEChA also kept the belief that Chicana/o higher education

should be for the end of going back to help the Chicana/o/Mexicana/o and Raza

communities improve themselves. By 1986 MEChA admitted sexism existed towards

Chicanas.104 Mechistas reaffirmed its commitment to the betterment of the community.

The questions of ideology, identity, the treatment of Chicanas were part of this

commitment through the Philosophy of MEChA.

MEChA began revisions of the position papers at the Casa Ramona Community

Center in San Bernardino, California, at a Fall Summit in1986.105 Two more summits at

104 Tijerina Cantú, 621.

51

UC Riverside and Mt. Jacinto Community College in 1989 furthered the revision of

MEChA’s position papers. A new draft was produced in 1992 at California State

University Fullerton.106 This process was spearheaded by the Northern Regional Task

Force (NRTF), a committee representing MEChA from the northern region of California.

The meetings continued modifying MEChA’s philosophy four years later.107 MEChA’s

positions kept evolving or changing as different generations became part of the

membership, this in part explains why these documents continued going through cycles

of revising. It also represented the views current at the time they amended the position

papers. For instance, CSUN MEChA at the California Fall Statewide in 1996 decided that

they needed to address MEChA’s current positions on “La Mujer, Raza of Non-Mexican

Descent, LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bi-Sexual, Transgender [In Question]) Mechistas, and

Chicanismo.”108 The Philosophy of MEChA’s most recent amendments were made “at

the M.E.Ch.A. National Conference of 1999 at Phoenix Community College” on May

21st of 1999.109 The new changes from the 1986, 1989, 1992, 1996, versions were

incorporated to the 1999 draft. MEChA made statements on Chicana and Chicano

identity (Chicanismo), the Lesbian, Gay, Bi-Sexual, Transgender & In Question

Chicana/o community, Chicanas and Chicanos who are not of Mexican descent, and the

Chicana.

105 Ibid.

106 Ibid.

107 M.E.Ch.A. Position Papers, (1986). Author’s personal papers. Philosophy of M.E.Ch.A.,Amended May 21st, at Phoenix Community College, (1999). Author’s personal papers.

108 Ibid.

109 Ibid.

52

In my opinion the League of Revolutionary Struggle’s clandestine attempts to

take over MEChA, precipitated the writing of MEChA’s 1986 Position Papers. LRS

pushed MEChA to take a look at their place in their organization, pressuring them to

reevaluate their opinions, their daily operations as well as working relations with non-

MEChA individuals and organizations. It forced introspection of where they stood in the

community and academy. The long overdue acknowledgement of the Chicanas’

contributions to MEChA and the Chicana and Chicano community at large will be

addressed.

Sexism and La Mujer in MEChA

The exploits of Chicanas in MEChA took on different forms. During the late

1960s into the early 1970s, women were not in a position of leadership within MEChA,

nor did they speak as much as the men did. Chicanas were relegated to serving coffee,

and writing minutes for meetings.

By the late 1970s incidents of sexism towards Chicanas were still occurring in

MEChA. In her essay, by Sonia A. López, describes how mujeres were treated. She

recalled that,

In the more politically advanced M.E.Ch.A. organizations, lip service to Chicanademands and needs were given, and a ‘selected few’ Chicanas were givenleadership positions in organizations, boards, and committees. Yet in practice themen continued to be the ‘jefes’ [bosses] in decision making policies and politicaldirection.

Often, even though they contributed much of their time and labor, theseChicanas were not fully accepted into organizations. This caused many Chicanasto drop out of the M.E.Ch.A. organizations. The formation of Chicana groups,therefore, became the only vehicle through which some Chicana activists couldreceive moral and political support. At Long Beach State University [now CSULong Beach], for example, a Chicana group by the name of Hijas de Cuauhtémoc,separated from the M.E.Ch.A. organization. They not only created support forChicana activists, but also organized other Chicanas in the struggle of theirpeople. In this particular case, some of the male members of the M.E.Ch.A.

53

organization reacted to the formation of the women’s organization by conductinga symbolic funeral to make their dissatisfaction known.110

Chicana scholar and contributor to Chicana Feminisms: A Critical Reader (Post-

Contemporary Interventions), Maylei Blackwell writes “…women leaders were hung in

effigy outside of the MEChA trailer during this time, and later, after the publication of

the newspaper, a mock burial for the Hijas de Cuahtémoc was presided over by a

MEChA ‘priest,’ with tombstones where several of the members’ names were

inscribed...”111 While MEChA members were outspoken about their culture or capitalism,

it was taboo to discuss sexism. Nationalists and leftists alike were guilty of male

chauvinism. In an anonymous article to El Popo, a Chicano student newspaper at

California State University Northridge (formerly San Fernando Valley State College), the

author of the column made the attempt to defend Chicanas’ right of taking on a career but

could not let go of the traditional expectations most Chicanos anticipated, they wrote

“She is capable of being an artist, a writer, a poet, a historian, and a lawyer. She does not,

however, forsake her role as a mother and wife.”112 This quote is an example of how

women were allowed to take new roles so long as they did not cease their “primary

obligations.” Sexism shifted from expecting Chicanas to remain domestic and subservient

to having a career and not abandoning what was accepted as commitments of Chicanas.

The idealization of women is different, and not for better, this new idealism puts more

110 Sonia A. López, The Role of the Chicana Within the Student Movement, in Chicana Feminist

Thought: The Basic Historical Writings, ed. by Alma García, (New York: Routledge, 1997), 105-106.111 Maylei Blackwell, “Contested Histories: Las Hijas de Cuauhtémoc, Chicana Feminisms, and

Print Culture in the Chicano Movement, 1968-1973,” in Chicana Feminisms: A Critical Reader, ed. byGabriela F. Arredondo, et al. (Durham: Duke University Press, 2004), 64.

112 “What is a Chicana,” El Popo, Vol.1, no.1, March 10, 1970, El Popo Collection, Chicana andChicano Studies Department, Urban Archives Center, CSUN.

54

physical and emotional stress on the woman, “the super woman” because her

responsibilities are doubled. And this evidence of sexism continues to perpetuate the idea

that men should have no involvement in the home, and only involve themselves with

activities in which they will receive recognition. Conferences that were organized by the

Chicanas who had attended the first Chicano Coordinating Council on Higher Education

(CCCHE, El Plan de Santa Barbara) in 1971 addressed the need of support groups for

Chicanas and made it a point to include mujeres and form Chicana organizations such as

Hijas de Cuauhtémoc. As the 1980s emerged, Chicana feminism began to address these

injustices, not only in MEChA, but in other Chicana/o organizations. Queer Chicana

feminists like Cherrie Moraga and Gloria Anzaldua helped influence Chicanas to

advocate against the issues of sexism. In El Popo, a newspaper item by Mary Pardo about

Chicanas and how they were instrumental to the Chicano movement, she cites Rodolfo

Acuña about his thoughts on the Chicana’s participation in the Chicana/o movement; he

stated that “women have been the key movers throughout the history of MEChA at

CSUN -- the most consistent hard working force.” In this article, Acuña provided

analysis that Chicana and Chicano relationships needed to parallel one another, he

continued saying that “Chicanos must recognize that the relationship must be more equal.

We can’t have it both ways. If we establish relationships with politically aware Chicanas,

we can’t keep them barefoot, pregnant and tied to the kitchen stove.”113 Throughout

history, Chicanas’ work in the Chicana/o movement and MEChA for the most part has

not been recognized. Recently this has begun to change. Chicanas in MEChA are

113 Mary Pardo, “Dr. Rudy Acuña interviewed Mexicana/Chicana: forgotten chapter of history,” El

Popo, Vol. 14, no. 4, February/March 1980, El Popo Collection, Chicana and Chicano Studies Department,Urban Archives Center, CSUN.

55

receiving more recognition for their work, are in leadership positions, and have more of a

say in the directions that MEChA goes.114

In the MEChA Philosophy Papers of 1999 it says, “In the spirit of our past and for

the spirit of our future, M.E.Ch.A. will not condone, tolerate, or perpetuate sexism.”115

Mechistas are bound to expose anything he or she sees as resembling a sexist practice.

Recently, more workshops at California MEChA Statewide conferences are being offered

so that both women and men can discuss gender issues. The gender caucus is an exercise

that continues today at the California MEChA Statewide. The structure of the gender

caucus uses the “fish bowl method,” where questions that were approved through the

MEChA statewide liaison process will be used during the caucus. Women and men take

turns asking each other the questions that will have an assigned facilitator for the

discussion. According to gender, one group will form an inner circle and the other group

an outer circle. The outer group must refrain from talking while the inner group is

allowed to answer the questions they are asked by the facilitator and have the opportunity

to dialogue without interruption, and so that the outer group can practice listening about

matters of gender. Then the groups switch and repeat the process. In the last phase of this

activity, both groups integrate and have a discussion about what had been said earlier

with each participant promising to keep the dialogue confidential in order for it to ensure

the caucus as a safe space to talk about gender issues. This has created more sensitivity to

the treatment of Chicanas in every day life, especially when MEChA is organizing and/or

conducting meetings and functions.

114 Philosophy of M.E.Ch.A., Amended May 21st, at Phoenix Community College, (1999).

Author’s personal papers.

115 Ibid, 8.

56

A very poignant example of when traditional gender roles were reversed was the

MEChA contingent against the Democratic National Convention (DNC) of 2001, held at

the Staples Center in downtown Los Angeles. Chicanos were asked to make food and

clean, while Chicanas sat down to organize and develop the strategies and tactics for the

day. This example does not prove that gender equality has been obtained, but that like the

Philosophy Paper’s amendments of 1999 there are now attempts to remedy

discrimination towards Chicanas involved in MEChA. Another example, in 1993,

. . . the UCLA hunger strike included vital involvement by women strikers,speakers, negotiators, and in spiritual work such that as of professor Gina Valdezon the medical team and professor Laura [sic] Medina; they conducted prayers,blessings, and spiritual healing throughout.116

A Mechista talked about the gender dynamics in his chapter, he said “[m]y M.E.Ch.A.

chapter is 90 percent female,” Sergio Romero said, “but that doesn’t by itself reduce the

sexism. A few women will speak out against it but a lot won’t. I think high school

students are more likely to do it.”117

As time advances, more Chicanos are sensitive to issues of La Mujer.

Ernesto, a student of Acoma Community College (ACC), mentioned how

MEChA effected his opinions on how Chicanas are treated,

Being a male, I believe that many privileges are afforded to us. If I had been afemale, I probably would have not been as involved in activities and organizationssuch as M.E.Ch.A. I probably would have been restricted as to when and where Icould go. I would have never have been able to make field trips such as one I tookto the university. I know this because I have five sisters and saw the ‘burden’ thatwas placed on them for being women.118

116 Elizabeth Martinez, “Seeds of a New Movimiento,” Z Magazine, September (1993), 55-56 as

cited in Mora, 169. Silvia Pellarolo, a doctoral student had also been a hunger strike participant.

117 Ibid.

118 Marcos Pizarro, Chicanas and Chicanos in School: Racial Profiling, Identity Battles, andEmpowerment, Austin, University of Texas Press, 2005, 234.

57

A personal anecdote helps illuminate Ernesto’s words further. In 2001, when I was active

in MEChA, I was reprimanded by a Chicano for being tardy. This infuriated me, because

I was not given the chance to explain my tardiness. The Chicano male probably was not

expected to clean his house on Saturday like I was (those were my mother’s rules and I

had to respect them which can be interpreted as, internalized Mexican sexism). I could

not leave my house without cleaning the bathroom, my room, my brother’s room, living

room, etc. In retrospect, I should have shared my gendered obligations with him. On

another occasion where I was heading out to the MEChA contingent meeting to

participate in protests of the Democratic National Convention Center during August

2001. Before I left my father told me that if he caught me with a red bandana on my face

again119 to not bother coming back home. Disheartened, I still left. I do not know if my

father’s threats were because of me being female or because of the political activity, or

both?

Raza of Non-Mexican Descent and MEChA

MEChA is a supporter for people who are of non-Mexican descent. After the

Civil War in El Salvador in the 1980s many immigrants from El Salvador sought political

asylum in Southern California and this forced MEChA to re-evaluate its position on non-

Mexican people. It is a common misnomer that Central and South American people and

Mexicans or persons of Mexican descent did not interact in California prior to the 1980s,

let alone have a history between their cultures in Los Angeles prior to the Salvadoran

Civil War. From indigenous times when the Pochtecas/os120 would travel throughout the

119 I was showing solidarity with the EZLN, and my father found Sub-Comandante Marcos to be

offensive because he did not show his face.

120 Nahuatl word for merchants and vendors.

58

continents trading and selling, communicating with one another, to the nineteenth century

when Raza were cauterized and lashed for being considered “greasers” by the Anglo

establishment.121 Throughout the 1930s and 1940s there was a strong sense of solidarity

in union organizing by both cultures with organizations such as “El Congreso de Pueblos

que Hablan Español or the National Congress of Spanish Speaking Peoples.122 There is

no doubt that Central and South Americans faced persecution from colonizing forces

alongside Mexicans.

Throughout MEChA’s history many MEChA chapters believe that MEChA

should only be open to Mexicans. Nevertheless, by illustrating the history between

Central, and South Americans and Mexicans, connections can be made between Central

and South Americans and Mexicans to develop healthier relations. What we now know as

México, Central and South America did have distinct and diverse names and cultures

where perhaps boundaries existed, but not the military enforced borders that we know of

today. Though Mexica culture deserves respect like any other culture, Mechistas have

made the tendency to romanticize its history and as a result the humanity of the Mexica is

taken away, that is they were not perfect. This perspective does not claim that one should

not be proud of their México heritage, but, forwards that Mexica peoples, did not live in a

vacuum where they did not interact with other peoples and their cultures. Even in 1999,

at Phoenix Community College during the National MEChA conference, when the

Philosophy Papers were in discussion to amend the acknowledgement of Raza of non-

Mexican descent, there was disagreement in the voting process between California and

121 Rodolfo F. Acuña, Occupied America: A History Of Chicanos 5 th ed., New York, Pearson

Longman, 2004, 137.

122 Sánchez, 244-249, 251-252.

59

other states if people of who are not of Mexican descent are considered Chicanas/os, and

should non-Mexicans be allowed to be part of the MEChA membership. Nevertheless,

California’s MEChA chapters were able to attain enough support from other states so that

non-Mexican Chicanas and Chicanos work and presence would be recognized.

“Throughout MEChA’s history non-Mexican Raza participated” said Gustavo Licón in a

lecture he delivered at California State University Northridge about MEChA.123 Under

MEChA’s Goals and Objectives, in Objective One it states that “We recognize that

Chicanismo is evolutionary and that a Chicano identity is not a nationality but a

philosophy.” 124 As I have argued, MEChA’s position as of 1999 with the passing of the

Philosophy Papers at the National level postulates that Chicanisma/o is multifaceted,

fluid, and should remain open to interpretation. It is dangerous to create dogma and not

leave any room for challenge or debate on the construction of Chicano or Mechista

identity. Many influential women during this period of the Philosophy Papers late 1990s,

who were Chicanas of a Salvadoran and Guatemalan background, were student activists

that created impact and positive changes for the Raza, Chicana/o, and MEChA

community. It is clear that non-Mexican Mechistas do have concerns for the Chicana/o

and wider Raza community. Mora offers an important example taken from the UCLA

hunger strikes in 1993 that fought for the establishment of Chicana/o Studies,

Rachel was a Cuban American senior student in premed who began fighting forChicana/o Studies because of the unfair treatment that her classmates suffered thenight of May 11. Rachel became so involved coordinating the media committee

123 Gustavo Licón (Lecture, California State University Northridge, April 17 2008), Ana

Contreras, “Central America is focus of new organization,” Daily Sundial, January 25, 1993. GustavoLicón’s, “¡La Unión Hace La Fuerza! (Unity Creates Strength!) M.E.Ch.A. And Chicana/o StudentActivism in California, 1967-1999,” PhD diss, University of Southern California, 2009 doctoral work hasbeen criticized for not having interviewed Chicana/o studies faculty nor MEChA alumni at CSUN.

124 Philosophy of M.E.Ch.A., Amended May 21st, at Phoenix Community College, 7, (1999).Author’s personal papers.

60

and investigating on behalf of the assembly that she even decided to cancel herwedding and postpone applying to medical school. Those were the kind ofprofound and personal changes and decisions that the Chicano/a movementproduced in young Latino/as.125

Another example of a non-Chicana/o for Chicana/o advocacy during the hunger strikes at

UCLA was an Asian American. “Though I am Asian, Chicano Studies has become my

struggle . . . ,”126 which can be interpreted as an expression of her passion for the

Chicana/o community because she chooses to identify. She continues in her speech that

she gave at Murphy Hall,

I’m also fighting in this struggle for my people, the Asian people, for Africanpeople . . . for all people of color who need to know about Chicano Studies,Mexican struggles about the realities of the mistreatment of Chicano people inthis country.127

Both of these women were not of Mexican descent, but they both lent their hand to the

Chicana/o studies hunger strikes at UCLA.

Ernesto Sanchez, a Chicano student from Acoma Community College (ACC),

described how he began forming his identity as a Chicano because of his Chicana/o

studies classes and MEChA, he suggests an open interpretation of what a Chicana/o is

rather than what a Chicana/o is not,

I found that role model in the Chicano Studies Instructor at ACC and it wasthrough him and my experiences with M.E.Ch.A. that I learned what it meant tobe Chicano. An identity which is always changing, hard to define and yet so nearto the hearts of so many who know that our gente are in a state of crisis and areengaged in the struggle to break the binds of oppression that have held ussubservient for so many years.128

125 Carlos Mora, Latinos in the West: The Student Movement and Academic Labor in Los Angeles,

United Kingdom, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2005, 146.

126 Ibid, 157.

127 Ibid, 158, Julia Lau, at Murphy Hall, June 3, 1993.

128 Pizarro, 232-233.

61

What is being explored here is the possibility of making the term Chicana/o more

inclusive to other folks who aren’t of Mexican extraction.

The LGBTIQ Chicana/o MEChA Community

Through political activism in the community, Gay and Lesbian social networks

created safe spaces and literature that reflected their experience which helped to create a

discourse that was critical of homophobia in the Chicana/o and Anglo heterosexual

communities.129 From 1996 to 1999, MEChA in the northern region of California felt that

it needed to call this inexcusable behavior into question. In the third objective of the

Philosophy Papers of MEChA, it describes the new position that MEChA took to address

the problem of homophobia,

Understanding that homophobia exists in our community, M.E.Ch.A. mustundertake the task of educating ourselves to put a stop to homophobic remarks inour organization. Being that there are Chicanas/os who are of the Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual/Transgender (LGBT) community we must work to provide a safeenvironment in M.E.Ch.A. Therefore, M.E.Ch.A. will not tolerate disrespectfulcomments to LGBT members as they are a vital part of our Chicano[a]community. Our Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender community is a veryimportant asset not only in the growth of M.E.Ch.A. but it also provides strengthand unity between our Mechistas.130

Also under the 3rd “Process of [this objective’s] Implementation,” it discusses that,

Any Mechista who makes homophobic remarks must be stopped and corrected.M.E.Ch.A. will not allow for any segment of our Chican[a]o community to bedisrespected as these remarks are as self-defeating in M.E.Ch.A.’s purpose tohelp create a safe environment for members who are Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual,Transgender (LGBT).131

129 Juan Arellano, Gabriel Meza Buelna, “Commentary Homophobia: Prejudice among us…,” El

Popo, Vol. 21, no. 2, Spring 1992, Enrique Castrejon, “Chicana/o Queers, Come Out: Take Over,” ElPopo, no. 2, Fall 1996, El Popo Collection, Chicana and Chicano Studies Department, Urban ArchivesCenter, CSUN.

130 Philosophy of M.E.Ch.A., Amended May 21st, at Phoenix Community College, 8, (1999).Author’s personal papers.

131 Ibid, 9.

62

On a personal level, many times throughout my involvement in MEChA, homophobic

remarks or acts have occurred. Not every comment or act was held accountable, but some

were. Also, it should be clear that this does not mean that there aren’t heterosexual

Mechistas who are not sensitive to the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, In Question

(LGBTIQ) community, or are at least making the efforts to do so.132

It is a good sign that Mechistas post 1990s continue to educate students and the

public about the LGBTIQ Chicana and Chicano community,133 informing people about

AIDS, exposing how it is affecting the Chicana/o heterosexual community at alarming

speeds, erasing the stereotypes of HIV being an epidemic that is only contained within

the Queer community. Erik, a CSUN MEChA member said in an interview “You learn

about what MEChA is and issues that I’ve been involved with like the AIDS awareness

event that took place in the Chicano House [at CSUN]. Our communities are being

greatly affected, for example, right now heterosexual women are being exploited and

being raped. . . . I thought it was important to address this issue.” 134 Marcos, a CSUN

and USC MEChA alumni, mentioned that in his MEChA experience at CSUN he would

encourage talks in meetings about whether any of the MEChA membership were open

132 J. Alfredo Santana, “Dancing for a cause: MEChA event highlights social equality,” Daily

Sundial, Vol. 50, no. 32, October 18, 2007, Nicole Medina, Letter to the editor, The Observer, February 9,2010, http://www.ndsmcobserver.com/viewpoint/lgbtq-support-from-mecha-1.1120682#, (accessedSeptember 21, 2010).

133 Kristen Whitehurst, “Activist brings light to lesbiphobia and religious homophobia,” DailySundial, April 24, 2007,http://sundial.csun.edu/2007/04/activistbringslighttolesbiphobiaandreligioushomophobia/, (accessedSeptember 15, 2010).

134 Susan Murray, “Students honored for work with LGBTQ community,” Daily Sundial, April 28,2010, http://sundial.csun.edu/2010/04/students-honored-for-work-with-lgbtq-community/, (accessedSeptember 15, 2010). Erik Mata, interview by author, Northridge, CA, August 11, 2010.

63

about being queer. He felt resistance which prompted him to take action about this

important issue,

. . . so that’s when I went ahead and started La Familia which is the onlyorganization here at CSUN, or was the only organization here at CSUN thatcatered to the Chicana/o/Latino/a population here on campus, and at the sametime it dealt with a lot of Queer issues that MEChA wasn’t dealing with so thisorganization definitely led on people to participate, not necessarily in organizingfactors, but also to try to bring in the idea of homosexuality to the organizingscheme and to have it as a forefront, you know as an issue that is affecting allorganizations not necessarily MEChA, because I feel like that has been one of mybiggest campaigns within the organization and trying to make it more inclusive ofpeople in general.135

Marcos continued on to say that the heterosexual membership of MEChA should also

address these important topics because it should not always have to be a person who

identifies with Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, or In Question,

. . . with issues of La Mujer right, if there aren’t any mujeres involved that doesn’tmean that issues of La Mujer do not need to be discussed. And it’s ok if a manwould bring issues of La Mujer into a discussion or issues of Queer people into adiscussion. It’s not gonna make you Queer or it’s not gonna make you a mujer ifyou bring up those issues like that. And I felt like that was the idea of MEChA.136

In MEChA, the heterosexual membership needs to continue these efforts of making queer

people acknowledged and feel safe. It is time to reciprocate that support that the LGBTIQ

Chicana/o community has always given the heterosexual Chicana/o community in the

faces of racial and cultural discrimination. It is important to note that one of the first

chairs from the MEChA chapter at California State University Northridge was Gay.

Impact of MEChA

In spite of sexism, women did manage to benefit from their experiences in

MEChA. Mechista alumnae do testify to MEChA’s importance in their educational

135 Marcos Zamora-Sánchez, interview by author, Northridge, CA, October 4, 2010.

136 Ibid.

64

careers that helped their leadership and coordinating skills into their academic and

community oriented professions develop even further. In an interview with professor

Roberta Orona-Cordova of Chicana/o studies at CSUN, she touches on how it helped her

career objectives unfold, “I was active in MEChA as an undergraduate. It was quite

beneficial because it helped me learn leadership and organizing skills. All this helped my

self-esteem which also gave me confidence to go on to higher education.” When I asked

her if she would have stayed in school or graduated without MEChA she responded, “No

I would not have. MEChA is a community that gives us a purpose and makes us aware of

what we have to do to change society and make our lives better.” In response to whether

she had selected a career because of MEChA, she said “Oh yes, I definitely went into

teaching because I want to give the students the same educational and learning process

that I went through.”137 In this same vein, Rosa Furumoto, a Chicana/o studies professor,

at CSUN, in a personal interview described her politicization and how MEChA had been

an influence,

I was co-chair in MEChA, we got the vatos and the locas involved, it was gangpeople doing those programs. I knew my life would be to serve the people. It wasthrough high school MEChA I went to college. Mr. Reza was a good advisor, hetaught a Chicano studies course, I took that course three times, that course helpedme to be proud of myself. Someone I really respect and his wife Mrs. Reza. I wassuper active all the time. I remember in high school there were demonstrators, wefed them. It helped determine the direction in my life. All I care about is servingthe community. I just care about justice. If I have to choose between writing apaper to keep my job and organizing a bus for a march, I’m gonna get thosebuses. I really like working with the Mechistas. MEChA, CAUSA. The minute Istop caring about the community I might as well be dead. I don’t care aboutmaterial things. The most important things are relationships.138

137 Roberta Orona-Cordova, interview by author, Northridge, CA, Spring 2006.

138 Rosa Furumoto, interview by author, Northridge, CA, Spring 2006. Rosa indicated that herexperience with MEChA was more connected to her when she was in high school, rather than to her collegecareer. CAUSA stands for Central American United Student Association (at CSUN).

65

I asked whether she had chosen a career because of MEChA she responded, “Definitely, I

needed one more course to get my degree in Biology, but I ended up getting a degree in

Chicano studies. MEChA as part of the movement that shaped me.”139 Looking at the

responses here it can be deducted that, though MEChA is an undergraduate experience, it

tends to be a set of unique experiences to each member that she or he is usually left with.

They are lessons that will help them in their future academic/career, community, and life

endeavors.

Conclusion

As time progressed, MEChA formed chapters, coordinated through counties and

regions within California, and nationally. As a form of defense for MEChA against other

organizations like the League of Revolutionary Struggle who wanted to take MEChA

membership away to join their respective group, MEChA wrote, drafted and amended

what we now know as the Philosophy of MEChA. In MEChA’s Position Papers (later the

Philosophy of MEChA), it addressed very important issues in the Chicana and Chicano

community such as sexism towards Chicana members of MEChA which was finally

discussed in 1986. As a result, women were starting to be acknowledged for their work in

the Chicana and Chicano community, and efforts are being made to improve the

condition of the Chicana today through the Philosophy of MEChA. Raza of non-Mexican

descent, the importance of acknowledging that our Central and South American sisters

and brothers are part of the Chicana and Chicano community, or (anyone else for that

matter that chooses to identify with the self-ascribed term Chicana/o). However,

according to MEChA, in choosing this identification comes a responsibility of remaining

active in the Chicana and Chicano community. The Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender,

139 Ibid.

66

In Question (LGBTIQ) Chicana and Chicano community were issues that were

acknowledged and amended into MEChA’s documents.

67

Chapter Four

MEChA’s current and future Challenges

Introduction

This chapter discusses el Movimiento Estudiantíl Chicano de Aztlan’s

involvement in establishing and preserving Chicana and Chicano studies in higher

education. The chapter will explore how MEChA functions as an educational support

system for Chicana and Chicano students. Next, it exposes the opponents of MEChA,

Chicana/o studies, and the Mexican/Raza/immigrant community in California and

Arizona as well as its contributions to a continued advocacy of Chicana/o studies will be

examined. Finally, the fortieth anniversary of El Plan de Santa Barbara, California

MEChA Statewide Conference at U.C. Santa Barbara and reflections with updates of El

Plan will be reported. Chicana and Chicano studies, MEChA, and the Chicana/o

community in recent times will also be considered.

Chicana/o Studies and MEChA

Chicana and Chicano studies is an area of studies that has survived in academia

for forty-one years. In “Chicano Studies: A Public Trust,” Rodolfo F. Acuña writes that

people have forgotten how Chicana/o studies began, or do not realize that it has not

always been available in the educational system to the public let alone for the Chicana/o

communities. “Chicano scholars have ignored the historical development of the discipline

that opened the doors of opportunity for them.”140 MEChA was key to the survival of the

area of study. Moreover, “[Chicana/o studies] builds student organizations such as

140 Rodolfo F. Acuña, “Chicano Studies: A Public Trust” in Chicano Studies: Critical Connection

Between Research and Community, National Association of Chicana/o Studies, 1992, 2, Rodolfo F. AcuñaCollection, Chicana and Chicano Studies Department, Urban Archives Center, CSUN.

68

MEChA, giving students a common historical memory and purpose.”141 Indeed, MEChA

was often the sole organization on campus that kept Chicana and Chicano studies alive

and forged space for Chicanas and Chicanos to become scholars. Unfortunately, as Rudy

Acuña has stated, both Chicana/o studies and MEChA have been forgotten or are not

aware their debt to Chicana/o studies or MEChA.142 More specifically Chicana and

Chicano studies contributed to the training of several generations of activists in the

university and college systems and thus forging a middle class. This activism is essential

in bonding students and then professors to the Chicana/o community and establishing a

communication network. This has built a demand for not only academic positions but

support services and works of literature and art. When someone applies for a job position

it is assumed that the person will know by experience what they are talking about, why

should being an activist in the community or at least in the university be any different?

Chicana and Chicano studies did not just have a pre-requisite of activism in its early

stages, but it built a tradition of activism so that the material in the classroom is relevant.

When devoid of an activist practice (whatever that activism may be) Chicana/o studies

falls short of its potential to make social and political change out in the community for

Chicanas and Chicanos.

Chicana/o students, faculty, and Mechistas knew that a Chicana and Chicano

studies curriculum in the university should reflect community issues. Mechistas also

knew that in order for their organization to survive, it needed to be connected to both

higher education and in community issues. This was necessary so that curriculum and

141 Acuña, 7.

142 Roberto Tijerina Cantú, MEChA Leadership Manual: History, Philosophy, And OrganizationalStrategy, Coatzacoalco Publications, 2007, 8-9, 18, 28, 305, 337, 369.

69

discipline could develop a permanent department in order for Chicana and Chicano

studies to continue and grow.143 During the late 1960s Chicanas and Chicanos sought to

hold educational institutions accountable by demanding the establishment of Chicana/o

studies departments.

One of MEChA’s most important goals was to make sure that Chicana and

Chicano studies departments were established. They used EPDSB as a guide. Not only

did MEChA help institute Chicana/o studies, but they also helped influence other

Chicanas and Chicanos to start campus organizations144 such as Aztlan Graduation and

Scholarship Committee, Ballet Florklorico de Aztlan, and Chicanos for Community

Medicine, which were present at California State University Northridge. MEChA and its

counterparts on other campuses fought to keep administrators honest by ensuring that

they provided more than a token class and/or later stopped offering those courses.

MEChA has a long history of defending Chicana/o studies.

MEChA as a Support System for Chicana/o Educational Advancement

MEChA was also active in the outreach and retention of Chicana/o students.145

MEChA can be seen as a substitute for resources that schools should have provided to

encourage Chicanas/os and Raza to attend and complete college. “For several students,

MEChA was a key support system that gave meaning to their schooling by providing a

network of friends who shared a vision of improving their community and by helping

143 Acuña, 4.

144 Armando Navarro, Mexicano Political Experience in Occupied Aztlán: Struggles and Change,Walnut Creek, Altamira Press, 2005, 371.

145 Cindy Von Quednow, “MEChA prepares high school students for college,” Daily Sundial, Vol.50, no. 96, April 2, 2008.

70

them on the path to their degrees,”146 wrote Marcos Pizzaro. Miguel Ceja in his article

“Chicana College Aspirations and the Role of Parents: Developing College Resiliency”

he discussed the part that parents have in first generation Chicanas developing goals in

order to finish their education. Ceja stated that through the parents’ life experiences of

Chicanas, their daughters were able to transform their negative barriers into positive

messages. The obstacles that existed in their families were used as sources of inspiration

and resourcefulness instead of dropping out of the university.147 Many Chicana/o students

struggling college/university life found some relief by joining MEChA. Ramona, a

Chicana student from Acoma, Washington had this to say about her educational goals and

their relationship to MEChA,

Right now mostly what has been influencing me a lot is MEChA. Because a lot ofgoals from MEChA are, like education, get educated and stuff like that. So thathas been an influence on me . . . There’s been people pushing me in MEChA andeverything . . . They’re always worried about who’s doing good and who’s not.148

Recruitment and retention programs make sure students are learning, whether or not they

need help with coursework, or need emotional support. Such programs can help students

to stay in school and graduate. MEChA has been such a program for Chicana/o students.

By joining MEChA this student found motivation to pursue a higher degree, because she

found a space that was relevant, to her and that she could relate to. It is MEChA’s belief

that students have improved their self-esteem when they find other students and

146 Marcos Pizarro, Chicanas and Chicanos in School: Racial Profiling, Identity Battles, and

Empowerment, Austin, University of Texas Press, 2005, 183.

147 Miguel Ceja, “Chicana College Aspirations and the Role of Parents: Developing CollegeResiliency,” Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 3, no. 4 (October 2004), under “Fresno Unified,”http://www.fresnounified.org/dept/planning/careerprep/Source%20Material/Chicano%20College%20Aspirations%20and%20the%20Role%20of%20Parents,%20Developing%20Educational%20Resiliency.pdf(accessed April 28, 2011), 5, 15, 18, 21.

148 Pizarro, 203.

71

curriculum that are culturally sensitive to them. Ramona was able to find an educational

and cultural paradigm (MEChA) that was consistent to her needs. Some Chicana/o

students even left their violent lives behind.

It is possible for a Chicano or Chicana to leave a gang if they make that shift to

higher education. For another student, named Ernesto Sánchez, MEChA was a huge

stepping stone towards advancing in scholarship and away from gangs. “Gradually, I was

able to stay away from the gang and spend more time in MEChA. I did not identify

myself as a gang member any longer, I was Mexican,”149 said Sánchez in an interview.

Chicanas and Chicanos, like anyone, need to feel like they belong to a group or people

they can depend on. It doesn’t necessarily have to be MEChA, but it would be good for

the Chicana/o student to be involved in her or his community in some way.

Pizarro criticizes that since mentors from MEChA are still at a learning stage,

because they have not graduated yet they may not offer the best mentorship. Despite that,

MEChA is a group that can discuss racism they may encounter as a collective. Some

students attend MEChA meetings and realize that it is not for them or they feel frustrated

that people cannot get over internal disputes.150 MEChA can be a positive experience, but

it can also have conflicts like any organization or group. Even if a potential member

decides not to join, MEChA at least hopes to leave the impression that the community is

a valuable resource that needs to be engaged.

149 Pizarro, 232.

150 Pizarro, 257.

72

Opponents of Chicana/o Studies, the Immigrant, and MEChA in California andArizona

Some of the administrators on campuses and colleges are not the only ones who

oppose Chicana/o studies and MEChA. Every time there is a dry spell of economic

despair Mexicans are blamed for the mismanagement of public funds by government

officials. The depression in the 1930s for example, economic struggle was followed by

Mexicans and Chicanos/as being forced to repatriate and be deported to Mexico to give

the remaining job opportunities to Anglo workers. On February 26th 1931, Mexican

nationals and U.S. born Chicanos were detained by Immigration officials in what became

known as “La Placita raid” at the Plaza Olvera in Los Angeles. Damage control was

attempted by the Chamber of Commerce by sending a press release to radio stations not

too much after this nefarious incident, but the release was sent not to apologize or ease

the minds of the Mexican community, rather to avoid unfavorable publicity since the

Olympics would be held the following year in 1932 in Los Angeles.151 The Voices of

Citizens Together (VCT), Save Our State (SOS), and the Minute Men Project (MMP),

Tea Party are some recent examples from the 1990s/2000s of hate groups who attempt

every effort to make the life of the immigrant, Chicana/o, and Mexican a hard one in

California. The legacy of hating Mexicans in California is one made of ignorance and

violent tendencies. It is these kinds of misunderstandings that lead to jingoist and

xenophobic behavior.152

151 Francisco E. Balderrama, and Raymond Rodríguez, Decade of Betrayal: Mexican Repatriation

in the 1930s, Albuquerque, University of New Mexico Press, 1995, 57-58, 62-63.

152 Tomás Almaguer, Racial Fault Lines: The Historical Origins Of White Supremacy InCalifornia, Berkeley, University of California Press, 1994, Martha Menchaca, Recovering HistoryConstructing Race: The Indian, Black, and White Roots of Mexican Americans, Austin, University of TexasPress, 2001.

73

There are many opponents of Chicana/o studies and MEChA. Groups have

formed throughout MEChA’s history that posit a nativist agenda, in order to oppose

MEChA’s work. During the Great Depression of 1931, a California senator demanded

that Mexicans without papers not be allowed to shop in the state or work. A director of

the Los Angeles Unemployment Department (LAUD), by the name of C.P. Visel,

circulated anti-Mexican propaganda in barrios that declared “that deportations would

include both legal and illegal Mexican residents.”153 More recently, right-wing groups

misconstrued El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan in order to forward a racist agenda against

Chicanas/os, Mexicans, Raza, and Immigrant communities. Mariscal pointed out the

irony of Patrick Buchanan, who is a descendant of immigrants and yet accuses MEChA

of bigotry.154 MEChA does not conduct hate crimes as portrayed by right wing media and

public figures. One need only look at MEChA’s history to see that this claim is untrue.

“According to an Arizona Republic article, Rep. Russell Pearce, the legislator

pushing for this proposal [to ban Raza studies at Tucson Unified School District], said

that groups like MEChA ‘indoctrinate students in what might be characterized as anti-

American or seditious thinking,’”155 wrote Rep. Pearce. Russell Pearce advocated for

153 Rodolfo F. Acuña, Corridors of Migration: The Odyssey of Mexican Laborers, 1600-1933,

Tucson, University of Arizona Press, 2007, 228-229, George J. Sánchez, Becoming Mexican American:Ethnicity, Culture, and Identity in Chicano Los Angeles, 1900-1945, (New York: Oxford University Press,1993), ACLS Humanities E-Book, 221.

154 George Mariscal, Brown Eyed Children of the Sun: Lessons from the Chicano Movement,1965-1975, Albuquerque, University of New Mexico Press, 2005, 264-265.

155 Matías Ramos, “Ethnic pride isn’t anti-Americanism,” Daily Bruin,http://beta.dailybruin.com/articles/2008/5/20/emethnic-pride-isnt-anti-americanismem/ (accessed May 20,2008), see Mathew Benson, “Plan targets anti-Western lessons Some fear loss of diversity in lawmaker’seducation proposal,” Arizona Republic,http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/0417unamerican0417.html (accessed April 17,2008), Ashley Thorne, “Protecting the Prickly: La Raza Studies,” National Association of Scholars,http://www.nas.org/polArticles.cfm?Doc_Id=323 (accessed September 4, 2008).

74

Senate Bill 1108 which would outlaw the formation of organizations like MEChA and

other chartered associations based on ethnicity on public college campuses and

universities in the state of Arizona. Equally important, if passed, this bill would dissolve

any departments in which “ethnicity is studied.” The current period is one in which racist

and ethnocentric proposals will be codified into law. Rep Pearce ignores the fact that the

United States was built by immigrants. America was given to what we now know as the

Western Hemisphere in honor of the Italian explorer Americo Vespucci. Secondly, Pearce

states that organizations based on ethnicity “indoctrinate” which is incorrect since student

populations can think for themselves in a critical way. Rep. Russell does not explicitly

deem what he considers anti-American ideology, and, therefore, anyone who does not

share his worldview (that of a white male in a position of power and privilege) becomes

an enemy. These laws are justified with ad hominem arguments on Mexican,

Chicanas/os, and Raza community, when in fact, MEChA is a mutli-faceted organization

with many of its goals being education for the betterment of the public.

Rudy Acuña, historian and activist astutely responds to this xenophobic

demagoguery, on behalf of the Chicana/o community “With that laundry list of stances, it

is easy to see how a fear-mongering legislator like Pearce would prey on a progressive

student organization to build his tough-man rep during a congressional campaign.”156

Pearce has no proof his laws will be implemented equally.

156 Ibid, see Howard Fischer, “Measure backs American Values in state schools,” Capitol Media

Services, East Valley Tribune, http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/114048 (accessed April 16, 2008),La Voz de Aztlan, “Arizona legislation will outlaw MEChA and Mexican-American studies,”http://www.aztlan.net/arizona_targets_mecha.htm (accessed August 25, 2008), Rhonda Bodfield, “TucsonRegion TUSD’s Raza unit survives under fire,” Arizona Daily Star,http://www.azstarnet.com/altds/pastframe/metro/240683 (accessed May 27, 2008).

75

Russell Pearce is passing off opinions for facts. Acuña in a Letter to the Editor

responds to Pearce by defending MEChA,

Pearce implies that MECHA excludes other races and promotes racism,which is just not true. For Pearce's information, MECHA organizations on everycampus are chartered by student affairs. In order to be chartered, the organizationhas to be open to all students regardless of their race, ethnicity or religion. Everycampus differs. I have visited hundreds of campuses throughout the country andhave found that on some campuses the majority of the members were non-Mexican American.157

Many former gang members are today lawyers, medical doctors and teachersbecause of Chicano studies and MECHA. Indeed, in California 85 to 95 percentof all Latino elected officials are alumni of this organization. Frankly, people likePearce relish in the portrayal of Mexican Americans as gang members rather thanuniversity graduates because they can step on us.158

Figure 4. Positive Representation in Education ¡No to SB1108!, Flyer

157 Rodolfo F. Acuña, “Letter to the Editor-Rodolfo F. Acuña responds to Arizona’s Rep. Pearce,”see La Voz de Aztlan, “Government attempts to outlaw M.E.Ch.A. in Arizona,”http://www.aztlan.net/arizona_targets_mecha.html (accessed April 21, 2008), Roberto Rodriguez, “TomHorne to Ethnic Studies: Drop Dead!,” Flor y Canto, http://www.florycanto.net/blog/?p=544 (accessedAugust 22nd, 2009), Jeff Butera, “School Official: Horne’s Bill ‘Racist, Facist,’” KPHO.com,http://www.kpho.com/news/19747803/detail.html# (accessed June 15, 2009).

158 Ibid.

76

In this flyer, activists’ that are against Senate Bill 1108 is expressed. In the figure

above it shows essentially the negative consequences if the bill were to be approved such

as not allowing any organizations to meet at educational institutions within the state of

Arizona if cultural identity is discussed. The curriculum must be authorized by the

Superintendent but Tom Horne has already said he does not approve of Raza Studies and

Women’s Studies. And, this bill would cut state funding in order for the Raza and Ethnic

Studies programs to be run. Along with images of students and teachers protesting on the

flyer are the contact numbers of the Arizona Senators and House of Representatives.

People who read the flyer are urged to contact them, both within and out of Arizona to

not vote on SB1108. Though this is a study of MEChA in Southern California, it was

important to address this situation because MEChA sees an attack on a Chicana/o as an

attack on all Chicanas and Chicanos. If these types of bills are not protested, they set a

negative precedent for the rest of Chicanas and Chicanos and people of color in other

states for their right to have a culturally and historically relevant education and their right

to organize on public colleges and universities.

Many other attacks on MEChA have occurred. A Mechista and an undocumented

student were recently deported in January of 2008. The student attended Palomar College

in San Diego and was taken with some of her family members.159 An even more recent

attack on MEChA occurred when Minutemen/Save Our State, a right wing, racist, anti-

159 Linda Lou, “President of MEChA club at Palomar College deported,” Copley Newspaper Site,

Union Tribune, http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/northcounty/20080116-1748-bn16mecha.html(accessed January 17, 2008), La Voz de Aztlan, “ICE arrests MEChA president and her family,”http://www.aztlan.net/mecha_president_arrested.htm (accessed August 25, 2008). See “Activists pushballot initiative to end state benefits for illegal immigrants and their U.S.-born children,” Teresa Watanabe,Los Angeles Times, http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-illegal-immigration13-2009jul13,0,4982035.story?page=2 (accessed July 14, 2009).

77

immigrant group connected to Voices of Citizens Together (VCT) happened on May 20th

2008 at California State University Northridge (CSUN). On their message board through

the internet, the VCT was organizing a demonstration to protest Mexican immigrants and

Chicanas/os who were graduating. One of the SOS protestors had a sign that read “Down

with MEChA, Fix Mexico First.” Members stopped traffic, intimidated the CSUN

Humanities graduation by wearing caps and jackets that read “ICE” (Immigration and

Customs Enforcement), zip ties, handcuffs, and pepper spray (even though none of them

worked for ICE and had no identification to prove this). Ironically, the group protested

the wrong ceremony.160

MEChA’s Chicana/o Studies Limitations

MEChA can be credited with helping to create and maintain Chicana/o studies

departments around the country, but there are limitations to these victories, “In spite of its

imperfections, the Plan of Santa Barbara has its place in history,”161 wrote Acuña. Many

forget that when El Plan de Santa Barbara was drafted there was a stipulation that

Chicana/o studies departments were meant to be temporary or transitional departments. In

El Plan de Santa Barbara’s section, Organizing and Instituting Chicano Programs on

Campus, the ultimate goal was, in fact, to develop a Universidad de La Raza or

Universidad Autonoma de Aztlan.162 There is an example, though, of a school that has

managed to dispel this notion, Academia Semillas del Pueblo (ASP), two K-12

160 b-cubed, “Minute Men plan to protest CSUN Chicana/o Studies Graduation” Los Angeles

Independent Media Center, http://la.indymedia.org/news/2008/05/217624.php (accessed May 17, 2008).

161 Rodolfo F. Acuña, “Chicano Studies: A Public Trust” in Critical Connection Between Researchand Community, National Association of Chicana/o Studies, 1992, 2, Rodolfo F. Acuña Collection,Chicana and Chicano Studies Department, Urban Archives Center, CSUN.

162 Chicano Coordinating Council on Higher Education, El Plan de Santa Barbara: A ChicanoPlan for Higher Education, Oakland, La Causa Publications, 1969, 20.

78

educational charter schools in East Los Angeles. Academia Semillas del Pueblo, an

educational institution that values cultural relevance and social consciousness in their

pedagogy. ASP also emphasizes preparation for college and university work that gives

their students the careers which will help them contribute to underrepresented

communities.

40th Anniversary of El Plan de Santa Barbara

Many more Chicanas and Chicanos are allowed to attend the college and

university systems since the passing of EPDSB. And some are fortunate to be able to

major in Chicana and Chicano studies. The fortieth anniversary of El Plan de Santa

Barbara took place last year at the MEChA Statewide Conference hosted by University of

California Santa Barbara, May 22nd-24th, 2009. Some of the original contributors to El

Plan de Santa Barbara were present at the “69ners Panel/1969-2009 El Plan de Santa

Barbara-Historia, Chicana/o Studies, and Future Activism of the Movimiento.” The

participants were Dr. Mariana Marin an alumna of University of California Santa

Barbara, Dr. Roberto Richard Valencia alumnus of University of California Santa

Barbara, Mr. Gus Chavez graduate of San Diego State University, Professor Armando

Vazquez-Ramos alumni of California State University Long Beach. Also one of the

original contributing artists to El Plan de Santa Barbara José Ernesto Montoya, a

Professor at California State University Sacramento participated at the conference as

well.163 During the 69ners panel the presenters shared with the audience the conditions

including MEChA’s role that existed during the time that El Plan de Santa Barbara was

written and what prospects for the future of the Chicana and Chicano community might

163 40th Anniversary of El Plan de Santa Barbara, California M.E.Ch.A. Statewide Program,

University of California Santa Barbara, 10-11, 19, (2009). Author’s personal papers.

79

be. Dr. Roberto Richard Valencia with his overhead projector presented that he had

belonged to the United Mexican American Students (UMAS) which would later become

MEChA after the El Plan de Santa Barbara conference. When he was a student at the

University of California Santa Barbara there were only fourteen Chicano students at the

campus. He discussed a book from 1962 The Other America, Poverty in the United States

by Michael Harrington. He also provided insights about the Black civil rights movement

and the Vietnam War. Another source of inspiration for the Chicana/o movement during

the 1960s was The Mexican-American People: The Nation’s Second Largest Minority by

Leo Grebler, Joan W. Moore, and Ralph C. Guzman. Dr. Valencia also mentioned that

Rodolfo “Corky” Gonzales gave a speech in down town Santa Barbara. He acquainted

the conference participants with some of the original organizations that had participated

at the Santa Barbara conference forty years ago such as the United Mexican American

Students (UMAS), Mexican American Student Confederation (MASC), Mexican

American Youth Association (MAYA), Mexican American Youth Organization

(MAYO), and Mexican American Student Association (MASA).

Dr. María Marin stated that she began as a student in the Fall of 1967 at the

University of California Santa Barbara. She talked about how UMAS had picketed the

Safeway store in 1968 when grapes were boycotted in Santa Barbara. She mentioned that

BSU, an African-American student organization took over the computer room at UCSB.

According to Dr. Marin, “The United Front” was a coalition of all ethnicities at the

University of California at Berkeley (UCB) which always had rallies and speakers. She

submitted that one thousand people had participated at the first National Chicano Youth

Liberation Conference. Some writers of the moment that influenced her were Carey

80

McWilliams, Julian Samora, and Ernesto Galarza. Two persons that were on the Chicano

Coordinating Council on Higher Education were from UCSB. During this time an “anti-

immigration ‘undocumented’” sentiment of Mexicans in California existed, said Dr.

Marin.

Mr. Gus Chavez presented information about the situation that existed for

Chicanas and Chicanos before El Plan de Santa Barbara and shared his projections of

what the circumstances for Chicanas/os would be like in the future. Before El Plan de

Santa Barbara, Mr. Chavez introduced that there was a Coors boycott going on. He also

shared his insights on what El Plan de Santa Barbara meant, he said that EPDSB

“produced a living document,” that the “philosophical elements of El Plan” were

important, and to consider “the short term and long term implications” of El Plan de

Santa Barbara. Mr. Chavez declared that Mike Firebaugh had been a Mechista.

Mr. Armando Vasquez Ramos from California State University Los Angeles

presented that the purpose of El Plan de Santa Barbara was “to generate activism, to

generate leadership.” He also shared that he was arrested as part of the 21 for Catolicos

Por La Raza. Mr. Vasquez Ramos asked an important question “What is El Plan de Santa

Barbara 40 years from now?”164 I think though we have made many accomplishments in

the Chicana/o community, the high school drop out rate is higher then it was back in

1969 (to be fair the Chicana/o population has expanded immensely), and the Chicana/o

community is still not completing higher education in considerable portions. And it is

valid to fear that many people including Chicanas and Chicanos are not informed about

164 Armando Vasquez Ramos (Lecture “40th Anniversary of El Plan de Santa Barbara,” University

of California, Santa Barbara, May 23 2009).

81

Chicana and Chicano history. That being said El Plan de Santa Barbara was instrumental

to opening the university doors to more Chicanas and Chicanos than prior to the

conference at the University of California Santa Barbara, the efforts of these participants

must also be acknowledged.

Figure 5. Save The Date! 40th Anniversary of El Plan de Santa Barbara May22nd to 24th 2009 at UCSanta Barbara La Lucha Sigue!, Flyer

82

Figure 6. 40th Anniversary of El Plan De Santa Barbara M.E.Ch.A. Statewide Conference May 22-24University of California Santa Barbara, Flyer

83

Conclusion

MEChA throughout its history has always been a proponent for relevant

education in the Chicana and Chicano community. MEChA has also been an educational

support network for Chicanas and Chicanos that come from a background where their

families have little formal education. A history of opposition towards Chicanas,

Chicanos, Mexicanas, Mexicanos, and Raza, unfortunately is not anything new, cases

dating back as far as1929 show the mass deportations in Los Ángeles of both non-citizens

and citizens alike of Mexicanas/os and Chicanas/os. Most recently, senators from

Arizona like Representative Pearce attacked the Raza community, Raza/Ethnic studies,

and MEChA with Senate Bill 1108 by trying to dismantle Raza Studies, other ethnic

studies programs. If it were passed other states could potentially follow suit. The Minute

Men Project continued their anti-immigrant actions for people of Mexican descent at

California State University Northridge’s graduation ceremonies in 2008. Despite these

attacks, MEChA and other caretakers of Chicana/o studies have made Chicana and

Chicano studies more pervasive and increased its development throughout these forty-one

years.

84

Chapter Five

Conclusion

Reflections

. . . M.E.Ch.A.’s ultimate goal, is to not need a M.E.Ch.A.

—Luis Rodriguez, Daily Sundial

Introduction

MEChA was founded on the principle of furthering education in Chicano

communities. Chicano studies in higher education continues to be a strong priority for

most members, something that many Mechistas fight for on a daily basis. This

concluding chapter will offer final reflections of MEChA’s history in Southern

California, and a summary of each chapter in this thesis.

Reflections

My interview with Marcos Zamora-Sánchez, an alumni of University of Southern

California and California State University Northridge captures much of what my research

documents. Marcos shares,

I think that as with a lot of movements, MEChA has definitely been in transition.I feel like the focus within the sixties was one, within the 80s was a different one,the 90s was a different one, and even when I was in school it was just a differentfocus. But I feel that the underlying point for MEChA should be, you know,trying to get people into higher education just because that was pretty much thefoundation of the organization and how it came about.165

Furthermore, Marcos makes suggestions for the future of MEChA,

. . . Teach them [students] about the papeles [MEChA’s documents], teach themabout how MEChA started, why MEChA is even at the university level, youknow like why are they even in MEChA . . . .

165 Marcos Zamora-Sánchez, interview by author, Northridge, CA, October 4, 2010.

85

. . . We’re learning from MEChA, we’re learning from the organizing thathappens within the organization, and as an organization MEChA is, you know,growing with us . . . How can we make people more interested with what’shappening in their educational lives, what’s happening in Sacramento in terms ofthe budget decreases, and the tuition increases, and I feel like people are sounaware of what’s happening right now . . . people cannot communicate with eachother.166

I knew that I wanted to go to a university, but I didn’t know what path I wanted to

take. I come from a family that getting to college is a miracle in itself, let alone

graduating from it. Though my family has been supportive to the best of their abilities

throughout my academic career, college for them is a set of experiences, information, and

people they cannot relate to or would have trouble relating to. Thus, I was fortunate to see

a flyer announcing a MEChA meeting at Pasadena City College which led to my first

meeting in spring of 1998. MEChA was the network that gave me the support I needed to

become focused, to have perseverance, and to become empowered so that I could use my

personal agency to navigate through the academy.

Since I already had an interest in history, being exposed to MEChA and Chicana

and Chicano studies motivated me to pursue an education that was relevant. MEChA

empowered me; and I knew from that moment on that no one would be able to take that

away from me. The next step was to motivate other Chicanas/os attain similar results and

experiences that go with them. A historical consciousness brought the power of action to

do something with that consciousness and analysis. These were the fundamental lessons

MEChA had taught me and the type of practices that I attempt to keep.

166 Ibid.

86

Summary

Chapter one described the founding of MEChA within the social context of the

Civil rights movements in the United States and other parts of the world. Chapter two

explored how MEChA learned lessons of collective agency from other social movements,

both nationally and internationally. In MEChA’s formative years, the First National

Chicano Youth Leadership Conference in Denver, Colorado helped produce El Plan

Espiritual de Aztlan giving MEChA an initial framework of Chicano nationalism. The

Chicano Coordinating Council on Higher Education organized the University of

California Santa Barbara conference resulting in a manifesto calling for more Chicanas

and Chicanos in higher education El Plan de Santa Barbara, and the creation of Chicana

and Chicano studies and MEChA. The war in Vietnam furthered a sense of urgency for

MEChA to organize against the draft targeting African American and Chicano males.

Chapter three discusses how MEChA developed beyond the local level. MEChA

began to organize at the county, regional, and state levels. In the mid 1980s, MEChA

continued to revise itself as an organization. During this time MEChA dealt with an

organization named League of Revolutionary Struggle167 allegedly attempted to take over

MEChA chapters, steal their membership, and even remove persons in leadership

positions. This conflict ironically forced MEChA to re-examine its purpose, goals,

organizing strategies, ideology, and who they would and would not work with. This

reexamination eventually became formalized in “MEChA’s Position Papers.” With more

revisions in the late 1990s, this set of documents was amended to include a broader

167 It should be noted that the perspective of the LRS was not documented in this thesis. As has

been expressed by some, the struggle between MEChA and the LRS was mostly personal. This topicdeserves a broader interpretation which is the subject of another paper. Some credit the League ofRevolutionary Struggle having worked significantly in the union movement and have made othercontributions to diffusing the ultra nationalist elements within MEChA.

87

membership not of Mexican descent, the acknowledgement of the Chicana, and inclusion

of the Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual, Transgender, In Question community. Concluding this

chapter, MEChA alumnae discussed the positive effects that MEChA had in their lives

and in their careers.

The fourth chapter explored the beginnings of Chicano studies in the late 1960s at

the university level. Its developments since then have also been examined. MEChA is

seen as the primary student organization that has consistently ensured that Chicana and

Chicano studies did not disappear from the curriculum in colleges. MEChA also became

a support system for Chicana and Chicano students that needed help with their academic

work, peer support, study groups, and tutoring, etc. However, there would be no Chicana

and Chicano studies had not the Educational Opportunity Program been available.

MEChA had its allies, but also its opponents. Arizona House Bill 2281 (HB 2281)

eliminates Raza Studies curriculum from the K-12 Tucson Unified School District. A

court case is currently underway to appeal the passage. An attack on one state is a threat

to all as it will set the precedent for other states of this attack on the teaching of

Chicana/o studies. MEChA in and out of Arizona have been supportive of Tucson

keeping Raza Studies going.168

This study has shown that over the previous forty-three years, MEChA has

sustained the battle to maintain Chicana/o studies at the university level and to ensure the

representation of Chicana/o students in higher education. MEChA continues to connect

the community to academia so that higher education will be relevant to the lives and

needs of Chicana/o and immigrant communities. MEChA has proven to be an

organizational and educational tool that helps to empower many Chicana and Chicano

168 See http://saveethnicstudies.org/

88

students that in their efforts to complete an undergraduate education for the purpose of

helping underserved communities.

89

Bibliography

Primary Sources

Archives

Rodolfo F. Acuña Collection. Urban Archives Center, Oviatt Library, California StateUniversity, Northridge.

El Popo Collection. Urban Archives Center, Oviatt Library, California State University,Northridge.

Unpublished Sources

40th Anniversary of El Plan de Santa Barbara. Santa Barbara, Program, University ofCalifornia Santa Barbara, 2009.

California Statewide M.E.Ch.A. Constitution, Amended at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo,1998.

El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan. Handout,1969.

M.E.Ch.A. de U.C.L.A. Movimiento Estudiantíl Chicano de Aztlan 101. Handout, Fall,2000.

M.E.Ch.A. Position Papers. Handout, 1986.

Movimiento Estudiantíl Chicano de Aztlan Pasadena City College Constitution, PasadenaCity College, 1996.

National M.E.Ch.A. Constitution. Amended March 18, at San Diego State University,2001.

Philosophy of M.E.Ch.A. Handout, Amended May 21st, at Phoenix Community College,1999.

Newspapers and Journals

Arizona Daily StarArizona RepublicDaily BruinDaily SundialEast Valley TribuneEl PopoJournal of San Diego HistoryLos Angeles Times

90

ObserverUnion Tribune

Secondary Sources

Books

Acuña, Rodolfo F. Corridors of Migration: The Odyssey of Mexican Laborers, 1600-1933. Tucson, University of Arizona Press, 2007.

——–. Occupied America: A History Of Chicanos-4th ed. New York, Addison Wesley,2000.

——–. Occupied America: A History Of Chicanos-5th ed. New York, Pearson Longman,2004.

——–. Sometimes There Is No Other Side: Chicanos and the Myth of Equality. Indiana,University of Notre Dame Press, 1998.

Almaguer, Tomás. Racial Fault Lines: The Historical Origins of White Supremacy inCalifornia. Berkeley, University of California Press, 1994.

Arredondo, Gabriela F., et al. (Ed.) Chicana Feminisms: A Critical Reader. Durham,Duke University Press, 2004.

Balderrama Francisco E., and Raymond Rodríguez. Decade of Betrayal: MexicanRepatriation in the 1930s. Albuquerque, University of New Mexico Press, 1995.

Camarillo, Albert. Chicanos in a Changing Society: From Mexican Pueblos to AmericanBarrios in Santa Barbara and Southern California, 1848-1930. Dallas, SouthernMethodist University Press, 2005.

Chávez, Ernesto. “¡Mi Raza Primero!” (My People First): Nationalism, Identity, andInsurgency in the Chicano Movement in Los Angeles, 1966-1978, Berkeley and LosAngeles: University of California Press, 2002.

Chicano Coordinating Council on Higher Education. El Plan de Santa Barbara: AChicano Plan for Higher Education. Oakland, La Causa Publications, 1969.

Cotera, Martha P. (Ed.) The Chicana Feminist. Austin: Information SystemsDevelopment, 1971.

Darder, Antonia. Culture And Power In The Classroom: A Critical Foundation forBicultural Education. New York, Bergin & Garvey, 1991.

91

Esquibel, Antonio. (Ed.) Message to Aztlán: Selected Writings. Houston, Arte PúblicoPress, 2001.

Galeano, Eduardo. Book of Embraces. New York, W.W. Norton, 1991.

Gamboa, Harry, and Chon A. Noriega. Urban Exile: Collected Writings of HarryGamboa Jr. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1998.

García, Alma M. (Ed.) Chicana Feminist Thought: The Basic Historical Writings. NewYork, Routledge, 1997.

García, Mario T. Memories of Chicano History: The Life and Narrative of Bert Corona.Berkeley, University of California Press, 1994.

Gramsci, Antonio. Gramsci’s Prison Letters. Translated by Hamish Henderson. London,Zwan Publications, 1988.

Gutiérrez, David G. Walls and Mirrors: Mexican Americans, Mexican Immigrants, andthe Politics of Ethnicity. Berkeley, University of California Press, 1995.

Gutiérrez, Ramón. When Jesus Came, the Corn Mothers Went Away: Marriage,Sexuality, and Power in New Mexico, 1500-1846, Stanford University Press, 1991.

Heumann, Milton, Thomas W. Church, and David P. Redlawsk (Ed.) Hate Speech onCampus: Cases, Case Studies, and Commentary. Northeastern University Press, 1997.

Mariscal, George (Ed). Aztlán and Viet Nam: Chicano and Chicana Experiences of theWar. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1999.

———–. Brown Eyed Children of the Sun: Lessons from the Chicano Movement, 1965-1975. Albuquerque, University of New Mexico Press, 2005.

Matsuda Michael, Sandra Robbie, and Eleazar Martinez. Mendez Vs. Westminster For Allthe Children: the Story of an American Civil Rights Victory, Yorba Linda, Blue StatePress, 2006.

Medina, Lara. Las Hermanas: Chicana/Latina Religious-Political Activism in the U.S.Catholic Church, Temple University Press, 2005.

Menchaca, Marta. Recovering History Constructing Race: The Indian, White, and BlackRoots of Mexican Americans. University of Texas Press, 2001.

Mihesuah, Devon Abbott, and Angela Cavender Wilson. Indigenizing the Academy:Transforming Scholarship and Empowering Communities. Lincoln and London,University of Nebraska Press, 2004.

92

Monroy, Douglas. Thrown Among Strangers: The Making of Mexican Culture in FrontierCalifornia. Berkeley and Los Angeles, University of California Press, 1990.

Mora, Carlos. Latinos in the West: The Student Movement and Academic Labor in LosAngeles. United Kingdom, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2005.

Mora, Juana and David R. Diaz. Latino Social Policy: A Participatory Research Model.New York, Haworth Press, 2004.

Morin, Raul. Among the Valiant; Mexican-Americans in WW II and Korea. Los Angeles,Borden Pub. Co, 1963.

Muñoz, Carlos Jr. Youth, Identity, Power: The Chicano Movement. London; New York,Verso, 1989.

———. Youth, Identity, Power: The Chicano Movement-9th ed. London; New York,Verso, 2000.

———. Youth, Identity, Power: The Chicano Movement-10th ed. London; New York,Verso, 2007.

Navarro, Armando. Mexicano Political Experience in Occupied Aztlán: Struggles andChange. Walnut Creek, Altamira Press, 2005.

Oropeza, Lorena and Dionne Epinoza. (Ed). Enriqueta Vasquez and the ChicanoMovement: Writings from El Grito del Norte. Houston, Arte Público Press, 2006.

Oropeza, Lorena. ¡Raza Si! ¡Guerra No! Chicano Protest and Patriotism during the VietNam War Era, Berkeley, University of California Press, 2005.

Orozco, Enrique C. Republican protestantism in Aztlán: The encounter betweenMexicanism and Anglo-Saxon secular humanism in the United States Southwest.Petereins Press, 1991.

Padilla, Felix M. The Gang as an American Enterprise. Rutgers: University Press, 1992.

Pitt, Leonard. The Decline of the Californios; A Social History of the Spanish-SpeakingCalifornians, 1846-1890. Berkeley, University of California Press, 1966.

Pizarro, Marcos. Chicanas and Chicanos in School: Racial Profiling, Identity Battles,and Empowerment. Austin, University of Texas Press, 2005.

Poniatowska, Elena. La Noche de Tlatelolco. México, D.F., Ediciones Era, S.A. de C.V.,2006.

93

Rendón, Armando B. Chicano Manifesto: The history and aspirations of the secondlargest minority in America, Berkeley, Ollin and Associates, Inc., 1971.

Ruíz, Vicki. From Out of the Shadows: Mexican Women in Twentieth Century America.New York, Oxford University Press, 1998.

Saldívar, José David. Border Matters: Remapping American Cultural Studies, Berkeleyand Los Angeles, University of California Press, 1997.

Sánchez, David. Expedition through Aztlán. Perspectiva Publications, 1978.

Smith, Linda Tuhiwai. Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples.New York, Palgrave, a division of St. Martin’s Press, LLC, 2006.

Stefancic, Jean and Richard Delgado. No Mercy: How Conservative Think Tanks andFoundations Changed America’s Social Agenda. Philadelphia, Temple University Press,1996.

Tijerina Cantú, Roberto. MEChA Leadership Manual: History, Philosophy, &Organizational Strategy. Riverside, Coatzacoalco Publications, 2007.

Treviño, Robert R. The Church in the Barrio: Mexican American Ethno-Catholicism inHouston, University of North Carolina Press, 2006.

Trujillo, Charley B. Dogs From Illusion. San José, Chusma House Publications, 1994.

———. Soldados: Chicanos in Vi_t Nam. Sunnyvale, Patson’s Press, 2000.

Vigil, James Diego. From Indians to Chicanos: The Dynamics of Mexican-AmericanCulture. Prospect Heights III, Waveland Press, 1998.

Dissertations and Theses

Correa, Abel. “Black and Brown Relations in South L.A.: A Mis-Education,” Master’sthesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2010.

De La Torre, Mónica. “Emerging feminism(s): El Teatro de las Chicanas and Chicanafeminist identity development,” Master’s thesis, California State University Northridge,2009.

González, Omar O. “Constructing an ofrenda of my memory: an autoethnography of aGay Chicano,” Master’s thesis, California State University Northridge, 2008.

Guerrero, Carlos R. “The U.F.W.: a textual analysis of El Malcriado,” Master’s thesis,California State University Northridge, 1995.

94

Licón, Gustavo. “¡La Unión Hace La Fuerza! (Unity Creates Strength!) M.E.Ch.A. AndChicana/o Student Activism in California, 1967-1999,” PhD diss, University of SouthernCalifornia, 2009.

Moreno, Joseph G. “The political and social history of La Raza Unida Party in LosAngeles County: the struggle for a political voice in electoral politics, 1965-1980,”Master’s thesis, California State University Northridge, 2004.

Moreno, Louie H. “Chicano studies and community activism: a struggle for a communityvoice in Southern California 1968-2003,” Master’s thesis, California State UniversityNorthridge, 2007.

Oropeza, Lorena. “¡La Batalla Esta Aqui!: Chicanos Oppose the War in Vietnam,” PhDdiss., Cornell University, 1996.

Ramírez, Omar. “Black flag, red heart: a study of Chicana and Chicano anarchy,”Mater’s thesis, California State University Northridge, 2008.

Sandoval, Tony. “The modern significance of indigenous performance poetry,” Master’sthesis, California State University Northridge, 2007.

Valle, María Eva. “MEChA and The Transformation of Chicano Student Activism:Generational Change, Conflict, and Continuity,” PhD diss., University of California, SanDiego, 1996.

Electronic Sources

Articles

“Arizona legislation will outlaw MEChA and Mexican-AmericanStudies.” La Voz de Aztlan, http://www.aztlan.net/arizona_targets_mecha.htm(accessed August 25, 2008).

“Army’s Hispanic Access Initiative still draws some campus criticism.” Daily Sundial,http://sundial.csun.edu/2005/11/armyshispanicaccessinitiativestilldrawssomecampuscriticism/ (accessed September 16, 2010).

b-cubed. “Minute Men plan to protest CSUN Chicana/o Studies Graduation.” LosAngeles Independent Media Center,http://la.indymedia.org/news/2008/05/217624.php (accessed May 17, 2008).

Benson, Mathew. “Plan targets anti-Western lessons Some fear loss of diversity inlawmaker’s education proposal.” Arizona Republic,http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/0417.html (accessedApril 17, 2008).

95

Bodfield, Rhonda. “Tucson Region TUSD’s Raza unit survives under fire.” ArizonaDaily Star, http://www.azstarnet.com/altds/pastframe/metro/240683 (accessedMay 27, 2008).

Butera Jeff. “School Official: Horne’s Bill ‘Racist, Facist.’” KPHO.com,http://www.kpho.com/news/19747803/detail.html# (accessed June 15, 2009).

Ceja, Miguel. “Chicana College Aspirations and the Role of Parents: Developing CollegeResiliency.” Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 3, no. 4 (October 2004),under “Fresno Unified,”http://www.fresnounified.org/dept/planning/careerprep/Source%20Material/Chicano%20College%20Aspirations%20and%20the%20Role%20of%20Parents,%20Developing%20Educational%20Resiliency.pdf(accessed April 28, 2011).

“Congreso The Official M.E.Ch.A. Chapter of U.C.S.B., El Congreso OurStory.” Congreso, http://orgs.sa.ucsb.edu/elcongreso/ourstory/ (accessed May 16,2009).

Fischer, Howard. “Measure backs American Values in state schools.” East ValleyTribune, http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/114048 (accessed April 16,2008).

“Government attempts to outlaw M.E.Ch.A. in Arizona.” La Voz de Aztlan,http://www.aztlan.net/arizona_targets_mecha.html (accessed April 21, 2008).

“History of Educational Opportunity Program.” California State University Northridge,http://www.csun.edu/eop/history_index.html (accessed March 25, 2011).

“History of EOP.” California State University,http://calstate.edu/sas/eop/various/history.shtml (accessed August 12, 2010).

“ICE arrests M.E.Ch.A. president and her family.” La Voz de Aztlan,http://www.aztlan.net/mecha_president_arrested.htm (accessed August 25, 2008).

Lou, Linda. “President of MEChA club at Palomar College deported.” Union Tribune,http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/northcounty/20080116-1748-bn16mecha.html (accessed January 17, 2008).

M.E.Ch.A. de Eisenhower. “M.E.Ch.A. Emblem.” Rialto Unified School District,http://www.rialto.k12.ca.us/eisenhower/mecha/emblem.html (accessed January 8,2009 and February 26, 2009).

M.E.Ch.A. de Tejaztlan. “El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan.” University of Texas at Austin,http://studentorgs.utexas.edu/mecha/archive/plan.html (accessed May 20, 2010).

96

Medina, Nicole. “Letter to the editor.” Observer,http://www.ndsmcobserver.com/viewpoint/lgbtq-support-from-mecha-1.1120682# (accessed September 21, 2010).

Murray, Susan. “Students honored for work with LGBTQ community.” Daily Sundial,http://sundial.csun.edu/2010/04/students-honored-for-work-with-lgbtq-community/ (accessed September 15, 2010).

Ramos, Matías. “Ethnic pride isn’t anti-Americanism.” Daily Bruin,http://beta.dailybruin.com/articles/2008/5/20/emethnic-pride-isnt-anti-americanismem/ (accessed May 20, 2008).

Rodriguez, Roberto. “Tom Horne to Ethnic Studies: Drop Dead!” Flor y Canto,http://www.florycanto.net/blog/?p=544 (accessed August 22, 2009).

Sax, Melanie. “Protestors rally against Iraq war.” Daily Sundial,http://sundial.csun.edu/2007/03/protestersrallyagainstiraqwar/ (accessedSeptember 16, 2010).

Thorne, Ashley. “Protecting the Prickly: La Raza Studies.” National Association ofScholars, http://www.nas.org/polArticles.cfm?Doc_Id=323 (accessed September4, 2008).

Watanabe, Teresa. “Activists push ballot initiative to end state benefits for illegalimmigrants and their U.S.-born children.” Los Angeles Times,http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-illegal-immigration13-2009jul13,0,4982035.story?page=2 (accessed July 14, 2009).

Whitehurst, Kristen. “Activist brings light to lesbiphobia and religious homophobia.”Daily Sundial,http://sundial.csun.edu/2007/04/activistbringslighttolesbiphobiaandreligioushomophobia/ (accessed September 15, 2010).

E-Books

Sánchez, George J. Becoming Mexican American: Ethnicity, Culture, and Identity inChicano Los Angeles, 1900-1945. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993,ACLS Humanities E-Book.