Last week Feb 17, 1929, during the height of the nativist movement, three pioneering Latino civil rights organizations met at Obreros Hall in Corpus Christi, Texas and agreed to merge to form the League of United Latin American Citizens. The emergency of LULAC came at a particular history of South Texas when Hispanics were forced to attend segregated schools, restaurants and public facilities; could not serve on juries; were often denied the right to vote; had their lands routinely taken from them; and were the objects of racially motivated lynching throughout the southwest.
When the United States of North America annexed a third of Mexico’s territory following the Mexican War, nearly 77,000 Mexicans became U.S. citizens. For generations, these citizens were to be plagued by a prejudicial attitude which would result in overt acts of discrimination and segregation which in turn brought about the curtailment of many of their civil rights, privileges, and opportunities. The sign, “No Mexicans Allowed” was found everywhere.
In Texas, prejudicial attitude and discrimination acts had reached such extreme proportions that Mexican Americans started organizations as defensive measures against such anti-American practices. Outstanding among these were three organizations: The Order of the Sons of America with councils in Sommerset, Pearsall, Corpus Christi, and San Antonio; The Knights of America in San Antonio; and The League of Latin American Citizens with councils in Harlingen, Brownsville, Laredo, Penitas, La Grulla, McAllen, and Gulf.
There were serious doubts as to merger because of personal reasons and ill feelings that existed between the leaders of The League of Latin American Citizens and the President General of The Order of the Sons of America from San Antonio. With this in mind, The Order of the Sons of America and The Knights of America made an agreement to unite themselves even if The League of Latin American Citizens did not. For a year, Council #4 of The Order of the Sons of America and The Knights of America waited for the proposed merger. In the meantime, Alonso S. Perales was in constant contact with Ben Garza to bring about the merger. The fact that the long awaited unification convention was never called by the President General of The Order of the Sons of America resulted in the withdrawal of Council #4 from The Order of the Sons of America at a meeting held February 7, 1929. Also, at this meeting in which Alonso S. Perales was present, it was voted to have a uniting convention on February 17, 1929, at the Obreros Hall, on the corner of Lipan and Carrizo streets in Corpus Christi.
LULAC is not only the oldest, but their rich history of activism in advancing the economic condition, educational attainment, political influence, health and civil rights, but also makes them the most successful Latino civil rights organization in the country.
LULAC’s name and its membership policy deliberately emphasized the importance of citizenship – only American citizens could be full members of LULAC. The founders of LULAC believed this gave the group added leverage in seeking to reform American society to accept Mexican-Americans as full and equal citizens. Furthermore, it also put forward a particular identity for the new organization, one its leaders hoped that would change common assumptions about Mexican-Americans in American society at large.
Legacy
The philosophy and tactics LULAC in its first decade believed in a practice of negotiation with local leaders to bring change. If negotiation failed, they encouraged communities to pressure, investigated and documented charges brought by parents, brought evidence to the attention of higher authorities, and publicized the differences between facilities for Mexicans and those for Whites.
LULAC has played a role in the formation of several important related organizations. They created La Liga Pro-Defensa Escolar (the School Improvement League) in San Antonio, and formed a veterans’ committee to address the rights of G.I.’s before LULAC member Hector P. GarcÃa organized the American G.I. Forum. LULAC members established Little School of the 400, the model for the federal educational program Head Start.
Ironically, LULAC’s early view of oppression parallels with conservative’s reason for dismantling affirmative action. LULAC believed Mexican Americans were not victims of oppression but by a lack of initiative to take advantage of the opportunities they had and to make themselves into citizens that the rest of society would have to respect. In all, LULAC equated Americanism with middle-class success and believed that true leadership could emanate only from the middle class – speak English, dress well, encourage education, and be polite in race relations.
Post-WWII: Change in Vision
LULAC’s vision for Mexican-Americans was forced to change during the postwar years. Renewed immigration from Mexico changed the socio-cultural context and turned America’s attention to the Southwest and immigration issues.
One of the most misunderstood and oversimplified views was LULAC’s position on immigration. It is true groups like LULAC opposed immigration, more specifically temporary workers to America. Their argument arose out of concern they would force Mexican-Americans to find work elsewhere while temporary workers would be used as a captive labor force to lower wages; employers rarely treated Braceros according to the protections included in their contracts. LULAC leaders had the foresight to see the dangers of importing labors.
Before the passage of the Emergency Quota Act of 1921 was passed, the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization held a hearing, Temporary Admission of Illiterate Mexican Laborers, to address the labor shortage in the beat-sugar industry. The farmers argued importing Mexican laborers would be the best solution to address the labor shortage because they were considered disposable labor. Speaking in their behalf, TX Rep. John Garner explained the farmers would be able to save three times the amount of work a “negro and white man would do” because Mexican laborers are considered “peon labor,” people “who knows nothing about the question of money other than to get enough to live on.”
In 1942, facing labor shortages caused by World War II, the United States initiated a series of agreements with Mexico to recruit Mexican men to work on U.S. farms and railroads. These agreements became known as the bracero program. LULAC leaders felt the discrimination towards the foreign workers would threaten their desire for an educated Mexican-American population because the presence of cheap foreign labor would force Mexican-American families to move in search of work. In a letter to President Truman written by LULAC national president Raul Cortez, Gus C. Garcia, and George I. Sanchez expressed that thousands of resident families would be consigned “to live in slums, in extreme ill-health, in ignorance, and in a squalor that is spiritual as well as physical … . What does this promise to the coming generations, to the citizens of tomorrow, to the assimilation of a rapidly increasing number of “Mexicans,’ to the Four Freedoms, to the American Way?”
Once Bracero Program was established, it brought brought millions of temporary, contract laborers to the United States from 1942 until its termination in 1964. The use of Mexican immigrants as cheap manual labor on the great Southwestern farms is not a recent occurrence. It is a thoroughly entrenched system, a systematic exploitation of an underprivileged class of humanity as cheap labor. Crossing the border was a major hurdle in the journey north. Braceros were often subjected to humiliating exams and bureaucratic procedures. If they did not pass the medical exams, they were sent back to Mexico. Those who did make it across, found out their bracero contracts did not always deliver on their promises.
Poor housing conditions, disputes over pay, discrimination, inadequate health care, and a lack of worker representation were some of the braceros’ common grievances. There living condition usually consisted of a shacks or they were sometimes housed in converted barns and makeshift tents with limited water, heat, and sanitary facilities. They were often transported in unsafe and poorly operated vehicles. Although the work was grueling and housing substandard, many braceros endured these conditions, hoping to make more money than they would at home. Health and social services are non-existent. The diseases bred by such conditions are spread by rapid migration. As a result the braceros suffer a disease-death rate much higher than that of the native populations.
Click here to view the embedded video.
They realized that continued immigration would make complete assimilation. The increase in immigration forced LULAC to rethink their view and the approach the as a policy problem. The late 1940s through the 1950s LULAC had reach new heights with their activism. LULAC councils were established throughout the Southwest, and no other group could match LULAC in size of membership or influence.
Same Phenomenon, Different Era
Today, once again, we are confronted by a rising tide of anti-migrant sentiment. The arguments are the same, the view in the USis that “illegal immigrants” are violating of US immigration law; therefore Congress seeks to address this problem through anti-crime legislation. While the view in Mexico is that Mexican migrants are filling jobs Americans don’t want. What is intriguing, the need for temporary labor can be found over several decades in congressional testimony yet the solution has always been the same.
Latinos are now the largest minority in the US, but Latino community is no longer homogenous as in the past. It is now made up from many different countries with very different cultural backgrounds. However, like previous generations of immigrants and minority groups, anti-immigrant views have not changed. Once again, the Latino community will to look to LULAC and the National Council of La Raza to be their voice. Hopefully, they will not ignore the lessons of the past and not prove George Santayana, the Spanish-American poet and philosopher, correct; those of who do not know our history, are condemned to repeat it.