It’s Cinco de Mayo. Let’s Talk Identity Politics!

What's wrong with this picture?

Other than everything?  

Maybe we should look at los elefantes en la sala.

  

--In order to win a national election, Republicans must make substantial gains among Hispanic voters, a task more difficult than mocking Hillary Clinton for eating at Chipotle.

--Most outreach campaigns will reek of hypocrisy, given the party’s anti-immigration and voter-suppression efforts.

--Nominating Marco Rubio will not solve the problem because: él no es mexicano-americano. Él es cubano-americano.  And there’re big differences.

The biggest difference lies in the numbers.  According to the most recent U.S. Census, people with Mexican backgrounds make up 64% of the nation's 54 million Hispanic citizens, whereas people of Cuban background comprise only 3.6%.  In Florida, Cuban Americans — once the majority of the state’s Hispanics — now form only 29% of the population. And even that shrinking percentage is no longer dominated by rabid anti-Castroites (who tend to vote for Conservative Republicans), as the divided reaction to President Obama’s recent attempts to normalize U.S./Cuban relations attests.

Maybe wealthy Cuban Americans will no longer brandish the outsized political power to which they’re accustomed.

Moreover, there’s a longstanding enmity between Mexican Americans and Cuban Americans.  The former see the latter as elitist and as unjustly pampered by favored-refugee-status immigration policies. Non-Cuban Hispanics commonly believe that the United States regards Cubans as ‘worthy’ refugees, thanks to the Cold War and half-a-century’s worth of demonizing Fidel Castro, plus the fact that the first wave of incoming Cubans tended to be educated and wealthy (and white[ish]).  And that the United States regards Mexicans, particularly in the last decade or so, as ‘unworthy’ illegal penniless disease-carrying mooching peasant terrorists, an attitude now extended to would-be immigrants from Honduras, El Salvador, and other Central American countries. 

It’s their fault — Cuban-American Desi Arnaz popularized the domesticated but still exotic Latin Lover during television’s formative years; Castillian-American Leo Carrillo, playing the Mexican character Pancho in ‘The Cisco Kid’ during those same years, popularized the figure of the subservient and buffoonish south-of-the-border sidekick.

Being Cuban American has been a plus in South Florida, but it’s not necessarily a good thing elsewhere.  The Hispanic population of Texas, for instance, is overwhelmingly of Mexican heritage . . . which may be why the Cuban-Canadian-American Ted Cruz generalizes his convoluted family history (was his father a 14-year-old freedom fighter with Fidel?  A Batista/CIA informer? Did Cruz Sr. bribe his way into the United States?  How many nationalities have Cruz family members claimed and renounced?) into a muzzy Coming-to-America success story through which the Senator can be seen as a pan-Hispanic everyman.  (To be fair, Marco Rubio has executed similar narrative shuffles concerning his family’s refugee rationale.)

But Texan-Cuban-Canadian-American Senator Cruz has the identity politics problem solved.

That the Republican Party is flirting with nominating Cuban-American Senators Marco Rubio or Ted Cruz in part to win ‘the Hispanic vote’ betrays ignorance about the diversity of this country’s Hispanic population.  It could even be construed as vaguely racist, although ‘Hispanic’ is not a term denoting race (Hispanics can be Black, Indian, Mestizo, White, even Asian): if they don’t all look alike (despite George H. W. Bush’s famous comments about the ‘little brown ones,’ referring to his son Jeb’s children), they are part of an undifferentiated mass of suspect, potentially job-stealing-gene-pool-diluting-and-therefore-dangerous others.  

Not that the Republicans haven’t tried to play an ill-conceived Hispanic card before, like in 2012.  It didn’t work then, and it probably won’t work now.

¿Qué estás haciendo güey?

As things stand presently, Republicans will not gain much of the Hispanic vote, even if they nominate a Cuban American, because their policies are basically anti-Hispanic.  Anti-immigration-reform, anti-Dream Act, anti-expanded-voter-access to be sure  . . . but also anti-Obamacare, anti-SNAP, anti-anything that substantially helps poor, lower-class, and middle-class citizens.  

But what if Republicans go with the Hispanic majority, and nominate a Mexican American?  

Hmmm.  Who could that be?  I propose that Jeb (aka Heb) Bush might fit the bill.  He speaks Spanish well (Ted Cruz admits that he doesn’t, eh), he’s married to a real Mexican (neither Cruz nor Rubio is), and his own children are official Hispanics.  Heck, he even slipped up and identified himself as an official Hispanic.  Plus he’s a Roman Catholic (he only converted once, whereas Rubio has waffled with the Mormons and Protestants, and Cruz swims with the ultra-fundamentalist squishes).  Plus, and most important, not all of Bush’s policies are anathema to a Hispanic voter base.  Plus, he was governor of Florida — bring out the old-guard Cubans!.  And, maybe to the distress of the old-guard Cubans, he is actively courting the second most populous group of Hispanics:  Puerto Ricans.

Jeb Bush rocks his grafted roots

Jeb Bush’s ersatz-Hispanic candidacy still has significant downsides.  He’s smart enough to realize that Hispanics are not one undifferentiated writhe of gusanos hoping to burrow into the rich soil of government assistance, but he champions harsh economic policies that make it harder for non-privileged people to thrive and hawkish foreign policy that, taken to its logical endpoint, will end up burdening the poor even further.  His own super-elite pedigree (Boosh tres? ¡No mames!) acts against taking him seriously as an hombre del pueblo.  And most of all:

Julian (left) and Joaquin Castro

The Democratic Party can see Jeb one authentic Mexican American and raise him two!  The Castro brothers are the real Hispanic deal. Hillary Clinton would be crazy not to choose a [not-Fidel, not-Raul] Castro for Vice President (probably Julian, now Secretary of HUD, but having an identical twin doubles the campaigning possibilities).  If Bernie Sanders or another longshot wins the Democratic nomination, a Castro would remain a fine pick (or maybe, in name of gender balance, a Castro could be swapped out for Mexican American Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez).

Eso que ni qué.  Viva la política de la identidad.

Birthday party with real Mexican American politicians and real Mariachi

[Note:  ‘Hispanic’ became the official designation for Spanish-speaking, or descendants of Spanish-speaking, people during the Nixon Administration.  Now, official U.S. bureacratic communiques also use ‘Latino’ as a synonym; Hispanic refers to language (and therefore would exclude those of Brazilian heritage but include those from Spain), whereas Latino refers to geography (people from New World countries colonized by plundering explorers from the Iberian peninsula).  ‘Chicano’ [probably a shortening of ‘Mexicano’] was a the common term for Mexican Americans and is still heard in the West and Southwest. The problem with ‘Latino’ is that it’s a gender-specific term, making it more cumbersome to employ, and that historically it would reasonably include Italians. Thus, for convenience but knowing that many people understandably disklike this umbrella word, I’m using ‘Hispanic’ as a general term (there aren’t that many Brazilian Americans . . .).  Today, most U.S. Hispanics prefer to be identified just as ‘Americans’ or by their country of origin/heritage, with or without a hyphen. I use a hyphen for an adjectival phrase and no hyphen for a compound noun.]

References

Associated Press.  “Politics, cultures split Cuban- and Mexican-Americans.”  NJ.Com 7 September 2012.  http://www.nj.com/hudson/voices/index.ssf/2012/09/politics_cultures_split_cuban-.html

Blake, Aaron.  “Cruz’s father says he ‘basically bribed’ Cuban official to immigrate to the U.S.” The Washington Post Online 20 June 2013.  http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/06/20/cruzs-father-says-he-basically-bribed-cuban-official-to-immigrate-to-u-s/

Cuba 54 Blog.  “Rafael and Ted Cruz: Biggest Cuban Con Artists since Rosie Ruiz.” 3 August 2013.  https://cuba54blog.wordpress.com/2013/08/03/rafael-and-ted-cruz-biggest-cuban-con-artists-since-rosie-ruiz/

DelReal, Jose A, and  Ed O’Keefe.  “How Jeb Bush and Ted Cruz are making a play for the Hispanic vote (Wednesday and beyond).”  The Washington Post Online 29 April 2015. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/04/29/how-jeb-bush-and-ted-cruz-are-making-a-play-for-the-hispanic-vote-wednesday-and-beyond/ 

“Jeb Bush Accidentally Described Himself as ‘Hispanic.’”  BBC News Online.  6 April 2015.  http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-32199066

Kelly, Amita.  “Latino ‘Panhandlers,’ Ted Cruz and the Republican Push for Hispanics.’  NPR Online 1 May 2015. http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2015/05/01/403375859/latino-panhandlers-ted-cruz-and-the-republican-push-for-hispanics

Levy, Arturo Lopes.  “Why Senator Rubio’s Lies Matter.”  Huffington Post 14 April 2015.  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arturo-lopez-levy/marco-rubio-cuba-family-story_b_7058486.html

Mondragon, Joe A.  “Identity Crisis: Spanish, Hispanic, Latino/a, or Chicano/a?” Palabras 23 April  2014.  http://palabras.clovis.edu/index.php/2014/04/23/identity-crisis-spanish-hispanic-latinoa-or-chicanoa/

Perez, Daniel Enrique.  “Desi Arnaz: From Latin Lover to Innocent child, Wha Hoppened?”  Rethinking Chicana/o and Latina/o Popular Culture.  New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009, pp. 46 - 54.

U.S. Census Bureau.  “Facts for Features: Hispanic Heritage Month 2014: Sept. 15–Oct. 15.”  8 September 2014.  http://www.census.gov/newsroom/facts-for-features/2014/cb14-ff22.html

Vogel, Mike.  “Snapshots of Florida’s Hispanic Community.”  Florida Trend 30 April 2013.  http://www.floridatrend.com/article/15521/snapshots-of-floridas-hispanic-community

Thugs: Constructing Baltimore Rioters

A group of captured 19th-century Indian thugs

In the past few days, various public officials, like Baltimore’s mayor and President Obama, have been slammed for referring to rioters as ‘Thugs.’  The charge: ’Thug’ is now a dog-whistle term for unruly Black youths (or Black youths in general); even more, it’s a widely understood popular synonym for ‘nigg*r’ and thus is a racist slur.

Certainly, no sane person would accuse President Obama or Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake of deliberately casting such blanket aspersions on African American young people.  No doubt, they — and many journalists — use the term as it has been used for the last 100+ years in American English, as a synonym for ‘gangster’ or for a general anti-social miscreant.  But there are more complex racial penumbra about the word ‘Thug’ than are usually acknowledged.

Alice the Goon, Thimble Theater,  by E. C. Seger, 1930s

In the first half of the 20th century, ‘Thug’ commonly referred to organized crime figures, mostly those of Italian origin.  A similar word was ‘Hooligan,’ originally referring to Irish delinquents.  Yet another was ‘Goon,’ originating in a 16th-century word for ‘simpleton’ but popularized in the United States as a scary Popeye cartoon character (Alice the Goon), whose amorality was connected to her unnatural gender traits.  In other words, in American English, terms that index dangerous criminality often have or have developed connections with various minority or non-dominant groups, a connection not lost on NFL star Richard Sherman when he was called a 'Thug.'

Is Richard Sherman a ‘Thug’?

Yesterday, The Atlantic published an article about the use of ‘Thug’ that attempted to do two things.  First, it explored the word’s origins in discourses about Indian criminality.  Second, it detailed its appropriation by rap and hip-hop culture as, roughly, a signifier of authentic street cool and credibility — rather like ‘gangsta’ a few years back (or, probably, ‘niggah” as a still-current term of brotherhood).

NWA album cover, 1988

Let’s take the second point first, because it’s not that difficult to unpack.  One way that African American culture, particularly its youth culture, has resisted majority disparagement is to resignify the very terms of disparagement (fellow theory heads: drag out your Henry Louis Gates and Homi Bhabha).  In the age of social media, such resignification can happen very quickly.  Not everyone outside urban youth culture can keep up with these shifts.  Thus Obama and Rawlings-Blake (plus many newspeople, black and white) can find themselves caught in a rhetorical minefield.  Which isn’t to say that overtly racist use of the term ‘Thug’ doesn’t happen (see Ted Nugent, for example), casting contemporary usage into even more volatile territory and suggesting that public figures would be well advised to avoid the term.

Street Art by Gangsy?

Back to the first point.  The Atlantic article accurately summarizes the subcontinental history of 'Thug.’  It’s the name of a brotherhood/caste/cult/guild of murderous thieves first recorded in the 14th century. The word has its origin in the Sanskrit for ‘deceiver,’ as the Thug’s modus operandi was to insert himself into a group of traveling merchants, then strangle the targets and steal their money and goods.  In the 19th century, the British overlords of India waged war on ‘Thuggee’ and pretty much eradicated it.  Thuggee’s exotic criminality inspired a small but influential 19th-century subgenre of ‘Thug literature,’ including Philip Meadows Taylors’s 1839 novel Confessions of a Thug (available for free on Kindle!) and sections of Following the Equator by Mark Twain.  Such works were the conduit through which ‘Thug’ entered the English language, to be subject to continual and varied decontextualization — one of the best known being Mola Ram, the ‘Thug’ villain in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom.

Mola Ram (1984)

The Atlantic article does not investigate the reasons behind the British Imperial campaign against the Thugs.  Under William Sleeman, this campaign occurred in the years before the installation of the Raj, the complete British rule of India.  Part of Sleeman’s efforts no doubt was motivated by an imperial desire to impose law and order; part was to show why Indian peoples needed the strong civilizing hand of the British.  The more Indians could be shown as savage, amoral, idolatrous (Thugs were represented as worshippers of the bloodthirsty goddess Kali, even though many members of Thuggee were Muslim), the more British rule could be justified. In short, the demonization of the Thugs served British imperial interests.  It was not enough to identify them as robbers or killers; they had to be distinguished from garden-variety dacoits (brigands) by detailing secret signals, diabolical rites, hereditary bloodlines, even ritual drug use. There was no attempt to understand what may have made Thuggee seem a reasonable response to particular socio-economic-cultural conditions.

William Sleeman, Thug-Hunter

Segue to Baltimore, USA, 2015.  A big problem with using ‘Thugs’ to describe rioters, it seems to me, adheres in the term’s discursive history. When ‘Thugs’ are subject to ruling taxonomies,  they are reduced to quantifiable, potentially controllable entities — markers in an impartial knowledge system to be surveilled and contained (or, if necessary, destroyed) for the ‘greater good.’  This is what happened, more or less, in 19th-c. India. In a way, one could argue that this is what’s been attempted in the United States, vis-a-vis young black males.

It would be tedious to detail the homologies between 19th-century British reportage on Thuggee and 21st-century U.S. reportage on (African American even if no one says it outright) ‘Thugs,’ also parsed as ‘gang members’ (remember the ‘reports’ a couple of days ago that the Bloods and the Crips had banded together to kill police officers?).  Both Thugs and 'Thugs' have distinctive headwear (Thugs were believed to use their turbans/head scarves as garottes).  Both have initiation rituals, special vocabularies, and form a ‘secret’ brotherhood (Thugs could be born into the society or ‘recruited,’ and/or ‘apprenticed,’ usually when the would-be initiate was orphaned or abjectly impoverished).  Both ‘use drugs’ (Thugs were supposed to ingest gur [unrefined sugar, also known as jagaree, considered by Ayurvedic specialists as a useful stimulant and by British colonists as a craze-inducing intoxicant]).  

Thug encampment, 19th-century painting

The point?  Accusing a group of secrecy, covert messaging, bodily or vestimentary coding, and drug use — plus a malevolently anti-majority, anti-ruling class, anti-capital-controllers impulse  that easily translates into violence — is a time-honored way to simplify complex socio-cultural-economic interactions . . . and too often, to justify an agendum of oppression or, at best, neglect. Always, it allows erasure of very real grievances and inequities that may, in least in part, motivate and sustain such groups.

I’m not a conspiracy theorist.  I don’t believe that our President, or Maryland officials now or in the recent past, are trying to enact a capitalist-thug agendum by calling angry (and often thoughtlessly and destructively angry) young people ‘Thugs.’  Yet I do believe that the lexicological and political history of ‘Thug,’ and the way the word has been used ideologically and strategically, can shed some light on Baltimore 2015.  

References

Bhabha, Homi K.  The Location of Culture.  London:  Routledge, 1994.

Botelho, Greg.  “Don’t call him a ‘thug’ and 4 other things you should know about Richard Sherman.”  CNN News Online, 23 January 2014.  http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/22/us/5-things-richard-sherman/ 

Brinker, Luke. “Ted Nugent unloads on African-American “thugs” in horribly racist column about Ferguson.“ Salon, 2 October 2014.  http://www.salon.com/2014/10/02/ted_nugent_unloads_on_african_american_%E2%80%9Cthugs%E2%80%9D_in_horribly_racist_column_about_ferguson/

Fuerhard, Ben, and Bob Fredericks.  “Obama calls Baltimore rioters ‘criminals and thugs.”  New York Post, 28 April 2015.  http://nypost.com/2015/04/28/obama-calls-baltimore-rioters-criminals-and-thugs/

Garber, Megan. “The History of ‘Thug.’ The Atlantic, 28 April, 2015.  http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2015/04/thug/391682/

Gates, Henry Louis.  The Signifying Monkey.  Oxford:  Oxford UP: 1988.

Levs, Josh.  “After Baltimore riots, some leaders slam ‘thugs’ as the new n-word.” CNN News Online, 29 April 2015.  http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/29/us/baltimore-riots-thug-n-word/

Mahanandi.  “Jaggery (Gur, Bellam) — Sugarcane and Palm.”  Living in Consciousness, 26 November 2006.  http://www.nandyala.org/mahanandi/archives/2006/11/26/jaggery-gur-bellam-sugarcane-and-palm/

Roy, Parama.  “Discovering India, Imagining Thuggee.”  The Yale Journal of Criticism 9:1 (1996) pp. 121-145.

Sleeman, William Henry.  Ramasseana, or A vocabulary of the peculiar language used by the thugs.  Calcutta: Military Orphan Press, 1836.

Taylor, Phillip Michael.  Confessions of a Thug (1839).  Rupa Publications (electronic edition) , 2009.

Thornton, Edward.  Illustrations of the History and the Practice of the Thugs.  London: William H. Allen, 1837.

Twain, Mark.  Following the Equator.  American Publishing Company: 1897.

Wagner, Kim.  “The Deconstructed Stranglers:  A History of Thuggee.”  Modern Asian Studies 28:4 (October 2004) pp. 934-963.

Welcome back to the Debblog

It's political insanity time again, which means that debblogs cannot be far behind.  Do we take Bernie Sanders seriously?  Who wins the battle of the Florida Latinos (and proxy Latinos), Rubio or Bush III?  Is Hillary Clinton likable enough?  What in all the names of every medieval demon ever invented can be done about North Carolina politics?

Plus there's lots of compelling national and international news, plus art stuff, plus interesting books, plus the weirdness and wonder of religion, plus odd corners of history that may or may not be relevant to our world today.  

I have a new computer, and I'm technologically challenged, so I haven't been able to connect (continue) with my old blogs.  Maybe I'll figure it out. But until then, watch this space!