ETHS

4: INDIGENEITIES

Amber Rose González, Mario Alberto Viveros Espinoza-Kulick, Melissa Moreno, Lucha Arévalo, Eddy Francisco Alvarez Jr.

1

CHAPTER OVERVIEW

4: Indigeneities

Recognize theories and knowledge produced by Chicanx and Latinx Indigenous communities to describe critical events, histories, traditions, and social struggles, emphasizing agency and group affirmation. Identify and assess how struggle, resistance, racial and social justice, solidarity, and liberation among Chicanx and Latinx Indigenous folks of the Americas are relevant to current and structural issues such as immigration, settler-colonialism, multiculturalism, and language policies. Describe and actively engage with anti-racist and anti-colonial issues and the practices and movements in Chicanx and Latinx Indigenous communities to build a just and equitable society.

Introduction

🧿 Content Warning: Physical Violence and Sexual Violence. Please note that this chapter includes discussions of physical and sexual violence.

This chapter explores the themes of Indigeneity and migration as they affect social, cultural, and political intra-and-inter group dynamics among Chicanx and Indigenous Latinx communities native to the Americas and Indigenous to this hemisphere. By intra- and-inter-group dynamics, we mean between and across groups, which considers global political economies and social dynamics. This complexity requires the use of a transnational framework to look beyond rigid historical narratives of nation and Indigenous identity.

Chicanx and Indigenous Latinx peoples are affected by the legacy and ongoing violence of colonialism, attempted genocide against Native Americans by Europeans, contemporary issues of land displacement (especially in Central America and Mexico), harsh immigration policies, and militarized enforcement strategies. These systems intersect, and by examining them in-depth, we observe the tradition of people’s movement across land and water, establishing contact between groups and navigating power relationships.

Each section in this chapter provides a closer look at the concepts, histories, intersections, and complexity of Chicanx and Latinx Indigeneities. In the first section, you will learn more about the conceptual frameworks, terms, and definitions that inform our understanding of Indigeneity, migration, and racialized ethnic identity. This foundation guides our next section, which more closely examines the historical and political background facing Chicanx and Indigenous Latinx peoples today. These perspectives cut across human experiences and intersect with gender, sexuality, and race. This topic is the subject of the third section. In the fourth section, you will learn more about how Chicanx and Latinx Indigenous experiences intersect with sexuality, gender, and migration, including the gendered treatment of Indigenous women and social norms facing lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, Two- Spirit, and similarly identified LGBTQ2S+ people.

This chapter provides a window into the social struggles that motivate activism among Chicanxs and Indigenous Latinxs for cultural sovereignty, racial justice, decolonization of knowledge, and the production of cultural affirmation, resilience, and strong communities in the face of external threats and systemic oppression. Understanding these lessons can help us realize more opportunities to stand up against injustice in our diverse communities.

Decolonization refers to the multiple processes of resistance that work to end the dynamics of colonialism and establish, restore, and defend Indigenous sovereignty. It is important to note that decolonization is a political process that refers specifically to Indigenous sovereignty. It is not a general term that captures all forms of social justice.

This poem, “In Lak’ech,” is a philosophy rooted in Indigenous worldviews emphasizing interconnectedness, love, and respect, acknowledging life and community in the Anahuac (Mesoamerica) region in the oral tradition of Mayan culture, which was written by Chicano playwright and activist Luis Valdez. It is sometimes used in teaching Chicanx and Latinx studies courses.

 Learning Objectives

 Poetry Spotlight: In Lak'ech

2

Tú eres mi otro yo. (You are my other me.) Si te hago daño a ti, (If I do harm to you,) Me hago daño a mi mismo. (I do harm to myself.) Si te amo y respeto, (If I love and respect you,) Me amo y respeto yo. (I love and respect myself.)

4.1: Concepts for Understanding Chicanx and Latinx Indigeneities 4.2: Indigenous Histories, Wars, Imperialism, and Migration 4.3: Narratives, Representation, Epistemic Violence, and Healing 4.4: Gender, Sexuality, Migration, and Indigeneity 4.5: Conclusion

This page titled 4: Indigeneities is shared under a CC BY-NC 4.0 license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Mario Alberto Viveros Espinoza-Kulick & Melissa Moreno (ASCCC Open Educational Resources Initiative (OERI)) .

4.1.1 https://socialsci.libretexts.org/@go/page/138202

4.1: Concepts for Understanding Chicanx and Latinx Indigeneities

Core Definitions: Chicanx and Latinx Indigeneities

Indigeneity is a broad term that refers to a sense of belonging and ongoing ties among people from a shared homeland that originated before colonization. It is essential to understand the distinctions between Chicanx, Xicanx, Indigenous Latinx, and Latinx Indigenites. Indigenous Chicanx is a self-defined identity category signifying Indigeneity and awareness of their historical roots in this hemisphere, including Anahuac (Mesoamerica). Xicanx is a preferred identity term among some Chicanxs involved in Indigenous movements. “Chi” produces the same sound as “Xi,” but “Chi” is the Spanishpronunciation, and “Xi” is the Indigenous one.

Indigenous Latinx is an umbrella term for Indigenous migrants to the United States from South and Central America, the Caribbean, and Mexico (for example, Maya, Mixteco, Purépecha, Taino, Zapoteco, etc.). They are members of Indigenous pueblos or nations with traditional languages, customs, responsibilities to tribal communities, sensibilities, and dispositions. These identity labels were first introduced in Section 2.1: Defining Latinx Demographics.

To understand the lived experience of Indigenous Latinx peoples examined in this chapter, we rely on the work of Maylei Blackwell, Boj Lopez, and Luis Urrieta, who define Critical Latinx Indigeneities (CLI) as an analytic framework that addresses how Indigeneity is produced differentially by multiple colonialities present on Indigenous land, where different Indigenous diasporas exist in a shared space and is used to “critique enduring colonial logics and practices that operate from different localities of power as well as the physical, social, cultural, economic, and psychological violence that often targets Indigenous Latinx peoples, including forms of state and police violence, cultural appropriation, economic exploitation, gender violence, social exclusion, and psychological abuse.” CLI refuses the ways migration scholars overlook the ‘‘receiving countries’’ as Indigenous territories and nations. Thus, Critical Latinx Indigeneities works against the erasure of the Indigenous People. CLI examines mobility as a global Indigenous process of displacement and considers the shifts in racial formations and how Indigenous people are racialized differently across and between different settler states.

This perspective challenges Chicanx and Latinx studies to uproot ideologies in broader society, especially as they are reproduced through narrow definitions of Latinidad, as introduced in Section 2.1: Defining Latinx Demographics. For instance, Lopez and Urrieta say that the ideology of Indigenismo deployed during the Chicano movement is an “Aztec-centric celebration of the Indigenous past of the nation, which often serves to erase the present and future of the sixty-three Indigenous pueblos of Mexico” and the millions of Indigenous peoples living around the world. Others, like Tomas Perez, Jennie Luna, and Susy Zepeda, dispute that Indigenismo is only tied to Aztec culture and instead consider Indigenismo as promoting the various Indigenous pueblos for a growing sense of empowerment. This was observed in the case of Mexican President Larezo Cardenas when he provided institutional support to promote the culture, art, and history of many Indigenous Mexican tribes during his administration, which was not limited to Mexica Aztec. The various approaches to Indigenous identity are the subject of inquiry for Indigenous Chicanx and Latinx scholars.

The Indigenous Peoples/Indigenous Knowledges Caucus has been a part of the National Association for Chicana and Chicano Studies (NACCS) since the mid-1990s and was formed with much struggle to recognize Indigenous roots. The caucus was established in response to the Zapatista uprising and Indigenous social movements, reminding the world of the presence of Indigenous people in the Americas. Participating scholars have contributed to scholarship for understanding Chicanx and Latinx Indigeneities in relationship to identity, foodways, land displacement, social movements, and futurities across borders. It was founded by Roberto Cintli Rodríguez, Jennie Luna, Roberto Hernández, Patrisia Gonzales, Gabriel Estrada, and Steve Casanova, and then led by Ernesto Tlahuitollini Colín, Robert Muñoz, Devon Peña, Melissa Moreno, Susy Zepeda, and others. Some caucus members are displayed in Figure 4.1.1 at a NACCS conference.

1

2

 Organization Spotlight: Chicanx and Latinx Indigenous Scholars

4.1.2 https://socialsci.libretexts.org/@go/page/138202

Figure 4.1.1: “Indigenous Peoples/Indigenous Knowledge Members” by Melissa Moreno, Author is licensed CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Indigenous Roots in Chicanx and Latinx Communities Tienes el nopal en la frente (You have the cactus on your forehead) – dicho

This common and harmful saying means you are Indigenous or “look” Indigenous but are attempting to hide it. It is often used to refer to a self-hating person who appears to “clearly” look Indigenous but refuses to self-identify as Indigenous or with their Indigenous roots in any way. It is a saying that is commonly known among members of Indigenous Chicanx and Latinx communities. The common nature of this saying identifies how anti-Indigneous sentiments are part of sustained socio-cultural assumptions.

Like race and ethnicity, a sense of Indigeneity is constructed through cultural norms, shared group formations, communities, institutions, and families. Indigeneity is also often recognized and policed through phenotype, with individuals with darker skin and features associated with local Indigenous peoples being more likely to be visibly associated with stereotypes and cultural scripts about Indigenous people. However, Indigeneity is also constructed through systems of sovereignty, traditional knowledge, mutual recognition, and intergenerational kinship.

Indigenous peoples maintain and promote traditional languages, knowledge, and customs into the contemporary era. In the lands referred to as North America and Latin America, the Indigenous peoples have used names like Isla Tortuga / Turtle Island, referring to the North American continent; Abya Yala, referring to southern Mexico and Central America; and Pachamama, referring to South America. Indigenous people are also an active part of the culture, politics, and history of island societies in the Caribbean, such as the Arawak-speaking Taino people. These are regional solidarities that demonstrate the interconnected and globally conscious perspectives embedded in Indigenous communities.

In Figure 4.1.2, a visual representation is displayed with the percentage of Indigenous people living in Latin American countries today, which totals 46 million across the region and ranges from 0.2% in El Salvador to 62.2% in Bolivia. Guatemala follows this at 41%, Peru at 24%, and Mexico at 15.1%. There are over 800 recognized Indigenous groups in Latin America, with the most significant number of distinct Indigenous peoples residing in Brazil, with over 300 different Indigenous peoples represented. Scholars also estimate that 200 or more groups operate actively but do not seek state or federal recognition.

4.1.3 https://socialsci.libretexts.org/@go/page/138202

Figure 4.1.2: “Indigenous Peoples in Latin America” by Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), United Nations is licensed under free use

The labels on the chart read: Indigenous Peoples in Latin America. By the year 2010, an estimated 45 million Indigenous people lived in Latin America, accounting for 8.3 % of the region’s population. The United Nations has championed the promotion of their rights by using different resources and special regulations for this purpose. At present, there are 826 Indigenous peoples. An additional 200 are estimated to be living in voluntary isolation.

In the chart, the countries are labeled by their name, percentage of Indigenous people out of the total population, and Total number of Indigenous population. They are Mexico, 15.1%, 17 million, Honduras 7%, 537,000, Panama 12.3%, 420,000, Colombia, 3.4%, 1.6 million, Venezuela, 2.7% 725,000, Brazil, 0.5%, 900,000, Bolivia, 62.2%, 6.2 million, Paraguay, 1.8%, 113,000, Uruguay, 2.4%, 77,000, Argentina, 2.4%, 955,000, Chile, 11%, 1.8 million, Peru, 24%, 7 million, Ecuador, 7%, 1 million, Costa Rica, 2.4%, 105,000, Nicaragua, 8.9%, 520,000, El Salvador, 0.2%, 14,500, Guatemala, 41%, 5.9 million.

Additionally, the captions included read: “The countries with the greatest number of Indigenous peoples are: Brazil, Colombia, 102, Peru 85, Mexico 78, Bolivia, 39.” and “Many Indigenous peoples are in danger of physical or cultural disappearance: Brazil, 70, Colombia, 35, Bolivia, 13.”

And the chart is summarized with the text, “ECLAC encourages the region’s countries to put public policies in practice which: 1) are based on standards of Indigenous people’s rights, 2) include their perspectives and contributions to the region’s development, 3) consolidate improvements in their well-being and living conditions, political participation and territorial rights, 4) promote the construction of multicultural societies that benefit us all.”

4.1.4 https://socialsci.libretexts.org/@go/page/138202

Indigenous Identities: Terminology and Definitions

Various creation stories are associated with distinct Indigenous peoples and nations and tribes of the Western Hemisphere, reflecting the diversity of the land and peoples. Some peoples whose homelands are now occupied by the United States include peoples the Haudenosaunee (Peoples of the Longhouse, also known as the Six Nations), Diné (also known as Navajo), Istichata (also known as Muskogee or Creek), and Siksikaitsitapi (also known as Blackfoot). In the lands now occupied by Latin America and the Caribbean, this includes groups like the Mexica Aztec Nation, Maya, Zapotec, Purépecha, Mixteco, Mapuche Peoples, Guarani Peoples, and many more across the Southwest, Southeast, Caribbean Basin, Amazon Basin. Indigenous people have distinct names and histories, which include contact, trade, conflict, and more. There are differences and diversity among these Indigenous groups, including traditions, language, religion, political organization, and more. However, despite these differences, Indigenous groups across the western hemisphere share the experience of various European invasions and colonization, and resisting and adapting to preserve culture, heritage, and identity.

As a label, the word Indigenous is “used to describe peoples who existed before colonization and can be used to describe the Indigenous peoples of the Americas.” Always use the capital I: “Indigenous” to designate the term as a proper noun. By contrast, the word Indian by itself “connotes the history of settlers perpetuating genocide … While there are many individuals who use the term “Indian” to describe themselves, particularly when among their own in-group, it is often seen as offensive for non-Native individuals to use this term.” “The terms “American Indian,” “Native American,” “First Nations,” or simply “Native” are seen as more respectful.” Specifically, American Indian and Native American refer to Indigenous peoples of the lands currently occupied by the United States. First Nations is most frequently used by Indigenous people in Canada. Many individuals and communities primarily associate their identity with a specific tribal group or nation, like Chumash, Salinan, Purépecha, or Mixteco, rather than a general category.

For Chicanxs, in the 1960s, Aztlán was considered the name of a homeland in the area now known as the Greater Southwest in the United States. The claim to the Greater Southwest by Chicanxs in the 1960s is troubling because it overlooks the past and present existence of Native tribal nations living in the regions in these areas, who were colonized by the Spanish before becoming part of Mexico, and then the United States. The idea that Chicanxs had a rightful claim to the land is contradicted by the Nahua paradigm, which states that the meaning of Aztlán is not a physical homeland but rather a body of water that needs stewardship, from which ancestors of Chicanxs today migrated. This emphasizes the liberatory and transformative potential embedded in the idea of Aztlán, which is focused on antiracism, self-empowerment, and solidarity among Indigenous peoples. As well, many individuals and communities can trace their lineage to both Indigenous Latinx and Native American tribes, who had regular contact, trade, and cultural exchange in the region for centuries.

According to oral tradition, this is the last message by the Governing Council of Mexico Tenochtitlan, given by Cuauhtémoc as his last act of government on August 12, 1521. The message is about the importance of Indigenous parents teaching children traditions in the home, even during an invasion.

Our Sun has gone down

Our Sun has hidden its face

and has left us in complete darkness

But we know it will return again

that it will rise again

to light us anew

But while it is there in

the Mansion of Silence

Very soon will we join together and embrace each other

and in the very center of our being hide

all that

our hearts love

3

4

5

6

7

 Historical Spotlight: Last Message on Education (August 12, 1521)

4.1.5 https://socialsci.libretexts.org/@go/page/138202

and we know is the Great Treasure.

We will destroy all of our temples to the Principal Creator,

our schools, our sacred ball game

our youth centers

our houses of song and play

Our streets will remain abandoned

Our homes will enclose us

until our New Sun rises.

Most honorable fathers and mothers,

may you never forget to guide your young

and teach your children while you live

how good it has been until now our beloved Anahuac

sheltered and protected our destiny

and for our great respect and good behavior

confirmed by our ancestors

and our parents enthusiastically received

and seeded in our being.

Now we will instruct our children

how good it will be, they will raise themselves up

and gain strength

and how good it will be to achieve their great destiny

in this, our beloved motherland of Anahuac.

Mestizaje and the Intersection of Indigeneity and Race Stories of heritage among Chicanxs and Indigenous Latinxs vary on their past and present ties to their homelands. Mestizas/os/xs are a diverse population that has a combination of mixed heritage, often including Indigenous lineage, along with a combination of African and/or European backgrounds. Across these diverse groups, some have experienced contemporary forced acculturation, and others have been taught to believe they can assimilate and be invested in the dominant Spanish or Anglo-American cultural ways. The investment in whiteness is sometimes experienced through colorism when children are born, as they may be referred to as being a güerita/o or morenita/o if they have light or dark skin. Children’s light skin may be celebrated guided by the belief that they may eventually pass as white, which leads to identity conflict and pressure throughout development. Even the term “mestiza” or “mestizo” is sometimes used to assert a hierarchy between individuals of mixed heritage compared to Indigenous peoples with no Europaean (or African) heritage.

The idea of mestizaje, or mixed-race identity, emphasizes the multiple lineages that not only shape individual identity, but also the communities, cultures, languages, and traditions that we practice. José Vasconcelos Calderón called mestizos la raza cosmica (“the cosmic race”). However, an overemphasis on the mixing of various groups in Latin America can be used to create a false sense of equality that is not reflected in the actual conditions of racialized groups in Latin America, the United States, and Canada. In particular, Mexico and Brazil have both promoted a sense of national unity that attempts to erase differences based on race, color, and Indigeneity. For communities experiencing the effects of inter-generational oppression, segregation, and exploitation, the idea that all ethnic differences have fused in a post-racial society erases the realities of inequity and the importance of advocates calling for justice. For Indigenous peoples, reductive deployments of ethnic categorization can disrupt attempts for collective liberation.

Marginalization continues through everyday stereotypes and myths about Indigenous people taught in various institutions, such as schools, mass media, and policy. As an example of anti-Indigenous oppression among Chicanx and Latinx people, we may hear

8

9

4.1.6 https://socialsci.libretexts.org/@go/page/138202

pejorative terms like “India Maria” and “Oaxaquita,” signifying a connotation of inferiority. Community responsive efforts, like in Ventura California, have included the “No me llames Oaxaquita” campaign, which translates into “do not call me little Oxacca.” This effort created greater awareness about how this harmful term can negatively impact young people and their communities, motivating people to question their own biases and assumptions. Social movements have always been important for responding to the marginalization and direct threats to the lives of Indigenous peoples. Movement mobilization includes calling for sovereignty, treaty rights, resistance to Columbus Day and triumphalist narratives in history, stopping environmental destruction, water rights, cultural revitalization, land acknowledgment, and more. A land acknowledgment is a formal statement recognizing and respecting Indigenous Peoples as traditional stewards of the land as well as the historical relationship between Indigenous Peoples and their traditional territories.

Latinidad has also been critiqued for the ways that it calls for an overriding unity between all Latinx, Latina, and Latino people. These generalizations tend to benefit the most privileged within this group, including cisgender, heterosexual, male, English- speaking, light-skinned or white, citizen Latinos. For this reason, some groups who are multiply marginalized within the Latinx community have called against using this term, or qualifying it. Others have modified the term, including through the label, Afro- Latinx, which describes people from Latin America of African descent. For a refresher on Latinidad and Afro-Latinidad, you can return to Section 2.2: (Re)constructing Latinidades.

The histories and identities of Afro-descendant people and Indigenous peoples in the Americas have been interacting and intertwined for centuries. For example, the Garifuna people are of mixed African and Indigenous heritage from the island called St. Vincent. Members and descendants of this group exist across Central America, the Caribbean, and the United States, and are just one example of the strength and pride that has been built through solidarity with African and Indigenous heritage.

Afro-Latinxs are more likely to experience discrimination and policing in the United States than other Latinxs, and also more likely to raise these issues within Latinx communities more broadly. Within Latinx communities, dynamics of racism and colorism work to silence Afro-Latinx voices and discourage inclusive participation. Racial categorization in places like Brazil tends to be closely layered with colorism, leading to vastly different experiences of racial norms and consequences, even within biological families, based on one’s physical presentation of race.

In the United States, self-identified Afro-Latinxs make up nearly 25% of the total Hispanic population. This suggests that the concerns of Afro-Latinx people are more central to both Black and Latinx cultures than is typically represented in popular media or social movements. For example, Black feminism often credits the development of major theoretical traditions like intersectionality to African-American women in the United States. However, when considering transnational Black communities, there have been theoretical and conceptual developments in places like Brazil that serve as roots of contemporary intersectional feminist movements. Recognizing these mutual sources of inspiration and activist mobilization is an opportunity for transnational coalitions and mutual learning. For example, Angela Davis has made a practice of collaborating with Black feminist leaders in São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, such as Preta Ferriera, Lélia Gonzalez, and Marielle Franco.

The formal categorization of individuals into sub-categories by race was constructed by the Spanish empire in the Americas through the system of casta. Casta sorted people based on their heritage, religion, property ownership, occupation, race, color, place, and legitimacy of birth. A painting of the casta designations can be found in Figure 4.3 displays sixteen different designations organized hierarchically, with Spanish descendant (Español or Española) individuals ranked at the highest positions and those with Black and Indigenous ancestry ranked at the bottom. Note that these are historical terms and are not positive identity labels used in contemporary society. The categories displayed in the painting are included in the following list:

1. Español con India, Mestizo 2. Mestizo con Española, Castizo 3. Castizo con Española, Español 4. Español con Mora, Mulato 5. Mulato con Española, Morisca 6. Morisco con Española, Chino 7. Chino con India, Salta atrás 8. Salta atras con Mulata, Lobo 9. Lobo con China, Gíbaro (Jíbaro)

10. Gíbaro con Mulata, Albarazado 11. Albarazado con Negra, Cambujo 12. Cambujo con India, Sambiaga (Zambiaga)

10

11

12

13

14

4.1.7 https://socialsci.libretexts.org/@go/page/138202

13. Sambiago con Loba, Calpamulato 14. Calpamulto con Cambuja, Tente en el aire 15. Tente en el aire con Mulata, No te entiendo 16. No te entiendo con India, Torna atrás.

Figure 4.1.3: “Las castas” by Museo Nacional del Virreinato, Tepotzotlán, Mexico, Wikimedia Commons is in the Public Domain, CC0.

While the hierarchies created by Spanish colonizers and other European groups advancing white supremacy and settler- colonialism still influence social standing today, there are many active groups in social movements, politics, research, and education who are working to cultivate a sense of pride, community, and positive identity among Afro-Latinxs. You can learn more about these topics in Chapter 1: Foundations and Contexts. In Mexico, there is one of the largest Afro-Latinx populations. In 2020, a survey identified over 2.5 million Mexican residents who identify as Afromexican. As an optional exploration, you can learn more about some of the most recent research and scholarly books on the topic of Multiculturalism, Afro-Descendent Activism, and Ethnoracial Law and Policy in Latin America by visiting the Latin American Research Review website.

Footnotes Blackwell, Maylei, Floridalma Boj Lopez, and Luis Urrieta. “Special Issue: Critical Latinx Indigeneities.” Latino Studies 15, no.

2 (July 1, 2017): 126–37. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41276-017-0064-0.

Blackwell, Boj Lopez, and Urrieta, 131.

M. Bianet Castellanos, Lourdes Gutiérrez Nájera, and Arturo J. Aldama, eds., Comparative Indigeneities of the Américas: Toward a Hemispheric Approach (Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press, 2012), https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1kz4hbt.

Miléna Santoro and Erick D. Langer, Hemispheric Indigeneities: Native Identity and Agency in Mesoamerica, the Andes, and Canada (Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 2 018), https://muse.jhu.edu/book/62740.

Lori Kido Lopez, ed., Race and Media: Critical Approaches (New York, NY: New York University Press, 2020), ix.

Lopez, ix.

Lopez, ix.

15

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

4.1.8 https://socialsci.libretexts.org/@go/page/138202

Edward Telles, Pigmentocracies: Ethnicity, Race, and Color in Latin America, 1st ed. (Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press, 2014).

Gabriela Kovats Sánchez, “‘If We Don’t Do It, Nobody Is Going to Talk About It’: Indigenous Students Disrupting Latinidad at Hispanic-Serving Institutions,” AERA Open 7 (January 1, 2021): 1-13, https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584211059194.

Tatiana Flores, “‘Latinidad Is Cancelled’: Confronting an Anti-Black Construct,” Latin American and Latinx Visual Culture 3, no. 3 (July 1, 2021): 58–79, https://doi.org/10.1525/lavc.2021.3.3.58.

Luis Noe-Bustamante, Ana Gonzalez-Barrera, Khadijah Edwards, Lauren Mora, and Mark Hugo Lopez, “Majority of Latinos Say Skin Color Impacts Opportunity in America and Shapes Daily Life,” Pew Research Center’s Hispanic Trends Project (blog), November 4, 2021, https://www.pewresearch.org/hispanic/2021/11/04/majority-of-latinos-say-skin-color-impacts-opportunity-in- america-and-shapes-daily-life/.

Ana Gonzalez-Barrera, “About 6 Million U.S. Adults Identify as Afro-Latino,” Pew Research Center (blog), accessed October 18, 2022, https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/05/02/about-6-million-u-s-adults-identify-as-afro-latino/.

Telles, Pigmentocracies.

Gonzalez-Barrera, “About 6 Million U.S. Adults Identify as Afro-Latino.”

Jazmin Aguilar Rangel, “Infographic: Afrodescendants in Mexico” (Wilson Center, July 29, 2022), https://www.wilsoncenter.org/article/infographic-afrodescendants-mexico.

This page titled 4.1: Concepts for Understanding Chicanx and Latinx Indigeneities is shared under a CC BY-NC 4.0 license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Mario Alberto Viveros Espinoza-Kulick & Melissa Moreno (ASCCC Open Educational Resources Initiative (OERI)) .

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

4.2.1 https://socialsci.libretexts.org/@go/page/138203

4.2: Indigenous Histories, Wars, Imperialism, and Migration

Definitions and Theories of Migration and Indigeneity

🧿 Content Warning: Physical Violence. Please note that this section includes discussions of physical violence.

Indigenous people in Mexico and throughout Latin America impacted by invasions since 1492, imperialist wars, settler economies, and environmental destruction have had to engage in global migration in order to sustain their families and communities. Theories of migration and identity formation rooted in sociology, political science, and immigration studies have often tried to separate or misrepresent the realities of Indigenous people, including the presence and importance of Latinx Indigeneities. Chicanx and Latinx studies scholars, especially Indigenous scholars, offer a more holistic and clear understanding of the historical and conceptual background for understanding conflict, war, and migration throughout history and today.

To understand the experience of Chicanx and Indigenous Latinx peoples, it is important to understand systems of colonization and settler colonialism. Colonization refers to the action of overtaking control of another group’s territory by force using social, cultural, psychological and religious forms of domination. More specifically, the project of settler-colonialism refers to ongoing processes where the colonizing groups seek to eradicate and erase the people living in the territory they are colonizing and replace the Indigenous population with the settler population. For example, while European countries colonized parts of Asia and most of Africa, settler-colonialism is carried out in places like the Americas, Australia, South Africa, and Israel. One key aspect of settler colonialism is attempted genocide, which refers to a project trying to eradicate an entire population. This is accompanied by an ideologically rooted practice of dehumanization to justify and legitimize such actions. Multiple forms of genocide that Indigenous people have experienced have been identified by the United Nations.

Factors influencing an individual or community’s likelihood to migrate away from their current residence can include things like the inability to get a job, fear of violence, environmental degradation, or loss of family, as well as the characteristics of the receiving country, which can include things like the demand for migrant labor and the presence of jobs and housing. In the context of Indigenous migrants’ experiences, land displacement, deterritorialization, war, and colonization can separate families across national lines, leading to specific networks and pipelines that facilitate circular migration and enduring transnational ties. As well, Indigenous peoples construct complex transnational identities, which include critiques of settler and colonizer forces that operate through nationalism and federal governments. Displacement can lead to de-Indianization, which refers to the processes of hegemony that disrupt the livelihood of Indigenous peoples, through assaults on foodways, herbal medical resources, and cultural sensibilities. Systems of oppression by the dominant culture impact inter-and-intra-group relations as well this means affect their collaboration and conflict within and across groups. Also, de-Indianization can manifest in individuals being denied the opportunity to practice Indigenous heritages, languages, and traditions. This can also manifest in simple ways, like families hiding or ignoring their Indigenous heritage. It also results from historical, political, and transnational factors. For example, in some cases, major displacements of Indigenous Latinx communities took place during the 1842 US-Mexican Wars on both sides of the current border, the 1910 Mexican Revolution, the 1970s in Latin America, and in Central America during the 1980s as part of the US Cold War.

Imperialism, War, and Latinx Migrations

🧿 Content Warning: Physical Violence. Please note that this section includes discussions of physical violence.

In Mexico, Indigenous peoples have endured and resisted multiple waves of empire and colonization for hundreds of years. Prior to the arrival of Spanish colonizers, much of central and southern Mexico, along with central America, was claimed by the Aztec empire. Notably, the Purépecha people (whose land is located in the state of Michoacan, Mexico) were one of the only groups to successfully resist and expel Aztec domination. During the period of Spanish colonization, many Indigenous groups worked toward the goal of liberation and independence, including participating in the Mexican War of Independence, which ended in 1821.

Another form of resistance by Indigenous peoples and mestizos took place with the war against Spain from 1810-1821. The new Mexican nation built off of the culture and standing of the Aztecs by including the eagle in its flag and basing its name on the Mexica region and Mexico City, a seat of power for Aztec elites. However, throughout the 1800s, multiple Indigenous groups, such as the Comanche, Apache, Purépecha, Yaqui, and Maya, continued to engage in resistance against the nationalist project and the

16

17

4.2.2 https://socialsci.libretexts.org/@go/page/138203

expansive powers of the federal Mexican government. This widespread violence prompted many communities to migrate from their homelands to new communities and settlements.

In 1845, the United States government annexed Texas, which was considered an act of war by the Mexican government. A year later, in 1846, the U.S. Congress formally declared war on Mexico, at the request of President Polk. The U.S. was motivated by a desire to expand its territory westward, under the ideology of “Manifest Destiny,” which is the idea that the United States had a divine imperative to colonize the entire continent, from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean. Internal politics in the United States were also focused on the presence and expansion of slavery, with many of the northern states and the Northwestern territories outlawing slavery, while southern states defended the institution and sought to expand it into new areas like Texas.

The war between the United States and Mexico lasted two years. The U.S. military attacked and occupied major cities, starting at the periphery of the country and eventually moving forces deeper inland and capturing the capital, Mexico City. The war introduced American violence and colonialism into the lives of Mexican people and was ended by the Treaty of Guadalupe- Hidalgo. In this Treaty, Mexico ceded the land that now comprises the western United States, including all of California, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah, most of Arizona and Colorado, and parts of Oklahoma, Kansas, and Wyoming. Territory boundaries in Mexico prior to the US-Mexico War are displayed in Figure 4.2.1. Prior to the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo in 1848, the territorial boundaries in the western United States and northern Mexico were significantly different from the present-day borders. The region was largely under Mexican control and included territories such as Alta California (present-day California), Nuevo México (present-day New Mexico), Tejas (present-day Texas), and parts of Arizona, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, and Wyoming. The border between Mexico and the United States was not clearly defined, and there were ongoing disputes and conflicts over the control of these territories.

Figure 4.2.1: “Mapa de los Estados Unidos de Méjico” by John Disturnell, Wikimedia Commons is in the Public Domain, CC0.

At the end of the 19th century, the United States furthered its imperialist military aggression during the Spanish-American War, which occurred during the spring and summer of 1898. The Spanish government’s hold on its colonies in the Caribbean and Pacific Ocean was weakened by internal politics and growing resistance among the peoples living under colonial rule. The war began in Cuba, with the U.S. supporting the Cuban dissidents who were asserting their independence from Spain. The United States mobilized its Navy against the Spanish, however, this did not lead to independence for Cubans. Instead, Cuba was taken under U.S. control for a period of time.

The war between the U.S. and Spain also included Puerto Rico, which was converted from the Spanish colonizers to become a U.S. territory. And the war extended to the Pacific Ocean, with the U.S. taking over colonial control of the Philippines and capturing the territory of Guam. In all of these locations, including the Caribbean, the Spanish-American War created a new relationship of migration between the mainland U.S. and the peoples living in the Caribbean islands. By the 20th century, tens of thousands of Cuban and Puerto Rican migrants had made their homes in the mainland United States.

At the same time, the social and cultural upheaval in Mexico led to the Mexican Revolution in 1910. This revolution elevated the political ideology Indigenismo which emphasizes celebrating Indigenous cultures and the Indigenous peoples are often the foundation of contemporary Mexican culture, politics, and society. Indigenous Leaders like Emiliano Zapata led the 1910

18

4.2.3 https://socialsci.libretexts.org/@go/page/138203

revolution calling for land reform (i.e., El Plan de Ayala) to redistribute land to the working class and break up the control and domination by the landowning elite (hacienderos). Zapata’s Indigenous tribal community in Puebla was deeply tied to land and communal corn traditions. He actually carried the land grants of his tribe. This personal experience informed his commitment to fight for a degree of sovereignty.

Beyond economic concerns, the ideology of Indigenismo was also championed and represented by cultural figures like Diego Rivera and Frida Kahlo. The recognition of cultural value led the post-revolutionary Mexican government, like Lazaro Cardenas’ administration to support bilingual education in Spanish and Indigenous languages. Cardenas’ commitment to Indigenous tribal communities throughout Mexico, led to some threats on his life. At one point the Indigenous people of Janitzio, Michocan, had to hide and protect his life for a period. Anti-Indian and racist sentiments of the cientificos (eugenics) of the 1940s attacked policy and efforts benefiting Indigenous people of Mexico. In many ways, Indigenous groups have cultivated energy and support to carry on their heritage by teaching traditional customs and practices in the face of threat and violence.

In addition to the conditions in the “homeland” in the 20th century, the dynamics of U.S. Imperialism and militarism also negatively impacted the lives and migration patterns of Indigenous peoples in Latin America. Throughout the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, the United States government directly and indirectly caused widespread political instability and supported the overthrow of standing governments throughout South and Central America, including Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama, and Paraguay.

These actions were sponsored as part of the Cold War and politicians justified them by highlighting the antagonism between the U.S. and Communist countries, especially the Soviet Union and China. In the process, many Indigenous communities living in Latin America were subjected to violence, political corruption, and economic devastation. This led some Indigenous and mestizo groups to migrate to the United States, including entire communities and networks who brought with them Indigenous traditions of health and healing, languages, and customs of cultural wealth that they nurtured and passed on in their new homes. As a result, many communities in cities such as Los Angeles, Oxnard, Fresno, Bakersfield, and Santa Maria in California have substantial populations of Indigenous migrants from Mexico and Central America. They have created organizations of support as well, such as the Frente and others.

Footnotes Douglas S. Massey and Magaly R. Sanchez, Brokered Boundaries: Immigrant Identity in Anti-Immigrant Times (New York, NY:

Russell Sage Foundation, 2010).

Gloria Anzaldúa, Borderlands / La Frontera: The New Mestiza, 1st ed. (San Francisco, CA: Aunt Lute Books, 1987); Guillermo Bonfil Batalla and Phillip A. Dennis, México Profundo (Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, 1996); Jack Forbes, Aztecas Del Norte: the Chicanos of Aztlan (Robbinsdale, MN: Fawcett Publications, 1973).

Osuna, Steven. “Securing Manifest Destiny.” Journal of World-Systems Research 27, no. 1 (2021): 12–34, https://doi.org/10.5195/jwsr.2021.1023.

José Antonio Flores Farfán, “Keeping the Fire Alive: A Decade of Language Revitalization in Mexico,” De Gruyter Mouton 2011, no. 212 (2011): 189–209, https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.2011.052.

This page titled 4.2: Indigenous Histories, Wars, Imperialism, and Migration is shared under a CC BY-NC 4.0 license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Mario Alberto Viveros Espinoza-Kulick & Melissa Moreno (ASCCC Open Educational Resources Initiative (OERI)) .

19

16

17

18

19

4.3.1 https://socialsci.libretexts.org/@go/page/138204

4.3: Narratives, Representation, Epistemic Violence, and Healing

Dominant Narratives in the Representation of Native American and Indigenous Histories

When was the last time someone told you that you are important, your Indigenous ancestors matter, and that you can make a difference in your community? Worldwide Indigenous peoples have emphasized the value of community survivance. The reality of Indigenous peoples living and thriving in the contemporary global society while affirming their dignity and resisting neocolonial systems of oppression continues. In this section, you will learn more specifically about contested narratives of Native Americans and Indigenous Peoples. For example, this includes a recognition of the solidarity between Chicanx and Indigenous struggles such as in the 1992 protest of the 1994 Columbus Celebration in the U.S., the struggle against the PeaBody Coal Mining Industry in reservations, and more recently Standing Rock against the DAPL.

The saying “Indians are dead” is part of a master narrative that continues to circulate in schools and society. We refute that Indigenous people are dead or have disappeared. In the western hemisphere, Central America and the southern part of Mexico are home to the largest number of living Indigenous people today. In addition, people who self-identify as Chicana/o/x, Latina/o/x, Puerto Rican, Central American, and South American often have ancestors with Indigenous roots and they carry on their cultures, languages, traditions, and lifeways. Roberto “Cintli” Rodriguez and others have referred to members of this group as la Raza, which means people whose genetic matter has been in this hemisphere for thousands of years.

For many years, American and European scholars have presented the Bering Strait Theory to describe and categorize Native Americans as migrants to this country. This follows the logic of an “Out of Africa” hypothesis of human evolution, which postulates that modern human beings emerged from a single pair of genetic ancestors living in Africa, in an approximate location that would match the Bible’s description of the Garden of Eden. This theory suggests that humans arrived in the Americas about 15,000 years ago by migrating from Asia over through the Bering Strait, a land bridge between what is today called Russia and Alaska. This area was passable by land at the time, although it is covered in the ocean today. Native Americans and Indigenous people do not describe themselves as migrants from another place but have scientific and cultural knowledge of originating in their homelands. As Indigenous scholar and activist Vine Deloria has argued, along with other scholars and critics, there are increasing amounts of archeological and scientific evidence that refute the Bering Strait Theory, suggesting that the Bering Strait was unpassable until about 12,600 years ago, which is after documented human life had spread throughout North and South America.

The connection to the homeland is represented in creation stories. Each tribal community represents their ethics of stewardship and tending the land and culture in their stories. This is true and important for Indigenous people across the hemisphere, as noted in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People. This historic document sets the precedent for international law and the need to recognize the collective rights and sovereignty of Indigenous peoples on their land. It is available online on the United Nations website. In specific tribal community contexts, creation stories refer to the ecology and often center on a significant relative in the region, such as ants, badgers, birds, condors, corn, eagles, ravens, serpents, turtles, whales, and specific mountains. Stories of Indigenous heritage are shared through oral history. These stories carry important values, beliefs, sensibilities, and dispositions on ecology, life, death, and regeneration. These stories reflect the diversity within Indigenous peoples, their land, and cultural pride.

Bird Songs are a part of the California Native American traditions including the Cahuilla people located in southern California,. The practice of Bird Songs in celebrations, community gatherings, and ceremonies helps to communicate a continued cultural tradition that is rooted in ancestral knowledge. The documentary, “We Are Birds: A California Indian Story” by Albert Chacon, which is available on YouTube and licensed CC BY 3.0, demonstrates these practice real-time. The full documentary is one hour, seven minutes, and ten seconds.

Stories of Indigenous heritage are shaped by the specificity of each group’s creation story or creation story reflecting traditions and responsibilities tied to their people’s land, ecology, and/or sacred spaces. You can learn more about the Indigenous peoples of various lands throughout the world by visiting the Native Land map website. This is a secondary collection of territories and Indigenous peoples, which includes links to primary sources and information on Indigenous tribal lands. You can search by address, and one interesting place to start can be by exploring where you are currently residing or studying.

20

 Cultural Spotlight: Cahuilla Bird Songs

 Activity: Indigenous Land Website

4.3.2 https://socialsci.libretexts.org/@go/page/138204

Struggles for Truth and Accountability in Cultural Narratives Queer Chicana author Gloria Anzaldúa based her work on the knowledge of Native American studies scholars like Jack Forbes to represent the Indigenous realities of mestiza/o/x peoples. Her book Borderlands/La Frontera was first published in Spanglish and represents the sensibilities of mestizas, including topics like Indigeneity, Nepantla, Two-Spirit duality, and fluidity of gender, and colonial gendered morality. These areas of inquiry are carried on by young people and elders who work together to carry on their Indigenous traditions. Among the Indigenous cultural work Elder and Capitana of Danza Mexica Azteca Angelbertha Cobb, who is pictured in Figure 4.3.1. She posed in front of an artistic rendition of La Malinche, mother of the first mestizo, her same gesture and position. In Mexico City, Cobb was close friends with Frida Khalo and Diego Rivera and also directly benefited from the efforts of President Lazaro Cardenas, who recruited her as one of the best Indigenous dancers in the highland of Puebla. Cultural workers like her, and the work of other Indigenous cultural groups have helped to sustain and communicate traditional knowledge through art, dance, and dress.

Figure 4.3.1: “Elder Angelbertha Cobb, Mexica Danza Capitana, painted as La Malintzin Tenepal as known as La Malinche” by Melissa Moreno, Author is licensed CC BY-NC-ND 4.0

Solidarity across Indigenous and non-Indigenous people have been key to the survivance of Native peoples. Survivance refers to the collective process of survival, which carries forward the culture, peoples, and land beyond the individual. For example, since the early 1970s, a segment of Chicanxs, aware of and attached to their Indigenous roots, have participated in and supported the United Nations Committee for Advancing Indigenous Peoples’ Rights and Cultures Worldwide. Chicanxs and Latinxs people who support solidarity with Indigenous peoples have supported self-determination, cultures, and political resilience. Through the emergence of ethnic studies, Chicanx and Latinx studies, Native American studies, and the American Indian Movement (AIM), there has been an increase in awareness of various Indigenous movements. These movements share a commitment to Indigenization, supporting revitalization of Native languages, ancestral foodways, medical use, cultural burnings, midwifery traditions, dances, coming-of-age ceremonies, land acknowledgment, and more.

In order to effectively support decolonization, it is necessary to cultivate knowledge of diverse tribal groups. Awareness and education in the US of Indigenous and Native peoples, both past and present, can be attributed to the legacy and efforts of the civil rights movement, the American Indian Movement, Native American studies, and Chicanx and Latinx studies, as well as global Indigenous movements. Some examples include Sandinistas, Zapatistas, and water protection. In the context of the 1960s civil rights movement, there was a call to end institutional racism and colonization, to go beyond Eurocentric curriculum/knowledge, and for self-determination. With this came the emergence of ethnic studies and Native American studies at colleges and universities, which studied and deconstructed the colonial master narrative and connotation of triumphalist narratives of white supremacy and settler-colonialism, including holidays like Columbus Day.

For 500 years, the master narrative surrounding Columbus stood in the United States. Columbus Day became a federal holiday in the 1930s, however, several communities across the U.S. have come to realize and recognize the truth surrounding the violent domination and oppression that led to the slavery and genocide against Indigenous people in the Americas. Interestingly Indigenous Peoples Day, known as “Dia de La Raza” in Latin America and Mexico, has been recognized since World War I. In the United States, in many states and cities, Columbus Day has been replaced with Indigenous People’s Day, after many protests and efforts of

21

22

4.3.3 https://socialsci.libretexts.org/@go/page/138204

advocacy. For a deeper exploration of this developing history, the next section goes into more depth on the timeline of these movements.

A Timeline of Solidarity between Chicanxs and North American Native Americans Given the lack of California homeland education, in 1969 the California Indian Education Association established the Annual California Indian Conference to begin focusing on curriculum and educational issues impacting California Indian students and tribal communities.

In 1973, the American Indian Movement members and their allies met and decided to form the International Indian Treaty Council (IITC) to seek justice in the United Nations. In July 1990, Indigenous Chicanxs and Latinxs participated in the Indigenous Encuentro in Quito, Ecuador, where they had a seat at the table. In 1992 the IITC, which included Indigenous Chicanxs, stood strongly against the United States celebrating the 1492 invasion of Columbus. Indigenous people from across the Americas stood strongly in opposition, vowingnot tot celebrate the genocide of their ancestors through the proposed Columbus Day Celebration. The IITC and others raised awareness about the implications of genocide and the Doctrine of Discovery of Indigenous people. Political artists like Aztlan Underground and various Mexica Aztec Danza groups supported this movement as well. In 1994 the Zapatista uprising and social movement that Chicanx supported began in response to the oppression and domination by the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement. NAFTA altered the Mexican Constitution so that ejido plots of land could be sold to foreigners, where in the past it had been illegal. In 1995, some Chicanxs learned first-hand about resistance to environmental destruction by mining companies from the Diné Navajo Grandmothers. Chicanxs were invited to be a group of protectors for the Grandmothers from a coal mining company attempting to occupy their land. On the reservation, they learned about the historical resistance to genocide, toxic pollution in water, and nuclear waste to the environment. In 1998 California Native American Day was established and continues today to teach people of all ages about the tribal culture, histories, and heritage of California Native American tribes. In the same year, the State Board of Education adopted academic content standards for history-social studies but did not recognize the genocide of Native Americans. Then again in 2000, the California Department of Education did not recognize the genocide of Indigenous people in the model curriculum for human rights and genocide. In 2007 Josefina Medina and Rufina Juarez participated at the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues with La Red Xicana Indigena, an Indigenous women’s network, to present a Special Rapporteur on Migration Issues and food sovereignty. By 2007 the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People (UNDRIP), supported by the IITC, was completed and signed by all member countries in the United Nations. The U.S. was the last to sign. UNDRIP recognizes the history and contemporary experience of the Indigenous peoples of the Americas. Article 14 recognized the right to education without discrimination and access to cultural knowledge. In 2012, the Idle No More movement was born out of resistance to policy surrounding land and water impacting First Peoples in Canada. Native Americans, Indigenous peoples of the Americas, and allies including Chicanxs supported this movement across contemporary settler borders. The conversation about genocide, land invasion and the importance of Indigenous cultural pride was highlighted throughout this movement, and continued into the United States In community gathering spaces formed within protest sites, from 2016 to 2017, the Standing Rock Sioux tribe, water protectors from several Native American tribes, and Indigenous Peoples from across the hemisphere -- including South and Central America and Mexico -- came together to resist the Dakota Access Pipeline. They provided lessons about resistance to environmental destruction, intergenerational trauma, and survivance. These understandings were shared with thousands of families, allies, and media reporters for an entire year and beyond. In terms of cultural sovereignty and cultural revitalization, in the context of Indigenous Latinxs in California, we have observed a move toward bilingual and trilingual education, including English, Spanish, Mixteco, and other Indigenous languages. In 2017, First Nations launched the Native Language Immersion Initiative to support new generations of Native speakers and positive role models for young people. Some of these efforts are documented by the Oaxacalifornia Reporting Team. In 2017, Maylei Blackwell, Floridalma Boj Lopez, and Luis Urrieta Jr. published a special issue on “Critical Latinx Indigeneities” in the academic journal, Latino Studies. This helped to establish the importance of considering the dynamics of Indigeneity more closely among Indigenous Latinx populations. In 2019, the California Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum Advisory Committee convened at the California Department of Education in Sacramento and began with a land acknowledgment. The first draft of the high school curriculum was the first

23

4.3.4 https://socialsci.libretexts.org/@go/page/138204

ever to recognize the genocide and survivance of California Indians and Indigenous people. Chicanx that served on the committee, originally included a lesson about land acknowledgment and protection of sacred sites, but they were phased out. By 2022 the Indigenous Mayan-inspired poem, In Lak’Ech, was removed from State Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum. Currently, the Liberated Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum is creating more Native American Studies lessons on topics such as environment, citizenship, and culture, compared to the State Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum for various grade levels.

Jr, Vine Deloria. Red Earth, White Lies: Native Americans and the Myth of Scientific Fact. First Edition. Golden, Colo: Fulcrum Publishing, 1997.

Philip J. Deloria, “Indigenous/American Pasts and Futures,” Journal of American History 109, no. 2 (September 1, 2022): 255– 70, https://doi.org/10.1093/jahist/jaac231; Vine Deloria Jr., “Alcatraz, Activism, and Accommodation,” American Indian Culture and Research Journal 18, no. 4 (January 1, 1994): 25–32, https://doi.org/10.17953/aicr.18.4.34k28482k49m5145.

Mariana Mora, Kuxlejal Politics: Indigenous Autonomy, Race, and Decolonizing Research in Zapatista Communities (Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, 2017).

Oaxacalifornian Reporting Team / Equip de Cronistas Oaxacalifornianos [ECO], “Voices of Indigenous Oaxacan Youth in the Central Valley: Creating Our Sense of Belonging in California” (Santa Cruz, CA: UC Center for Collaborative Research for an Equitable California, July 1, 2013), https://www.academia.edu/4398867/Voices_of_Indigenous_Oaxacan_Youth_in_the_Central_Valley_Creating_our_Sense_of_Belo nging_in_California.

This page titled 4.3: Narratives, Representation, Epistemic Violence, and Healing is shared under a CC BY-NC 4.0 license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Mario Alberto Viveros Espinoza-Kulick & Melissa Moreno (ASCCC Open Educational Resources Initiative (OERI)) .

20

21

22

23

4.4.1 https://socialsci.libretexts.org/@go/page/138205

4.4: Gender, Sexuality, Migration, and Indigeneity

Gender, Migration, and Indigeneity

🧿 Content Warning: Physical and Sexual Violence. Please note that this section includes discussions of physical and sexual violence.

Critical Latinx Indigeneity emphasizes the complicated relationship between Indigenous peoples, historical traditions, and contemporary structures of governments across borders. For instance, Indigenous migrants can benefit from and participate in colonial political and economic structures, even while experiencing xenophobia and anti-immigrant exclusion. Bringing together critical perspectives with cultural humility between various contexts can allow Indigenous communities to forge more effective solidarities and resist settler-colonial structures. Utilizing an intersectional perspective also helps to balance the complexity of Indigeneity with migration status, alongside gender, sexuality, and economic factors.

Gender and family dynamics are deeply influential in shaping both immigration policies and immigrant experiences. Labor demands are often constructed in binary gendered terms. For instance, the Bracero program from 1942 to 1964 solicited agricultural labor from Mexican nationals in the U.S., focusing on short-term visas offered to individual mestizo men. This was meant to restrict the formation of family and sustained communities and instead contribute to the exploitation of farmworkers. Farm owners ignored labor laws, and often requested more visas and workers than they could employ at any time. This created a ready supply of unemployed migrants who were ineligible for virtually any other kind of legal employment. By contrast, domestic work and care industries often rely on migrant women laborers. However, a similar logic of family separation and isolation contributes to exploitation and poor working conditions. In particular, for workers who provide service directly in the home, such as nannies, housekeepers, cooks, and nurses, employers can leverage a workers’ documentation status to exploit their time, provide substandard pay, and carry out sustained emotional manipulation. These positions are more often occupied by Indigenous peoples, given that they are more likely to be low-income and/or undocumented.

Gender influences the multi-level factors that determine community wellbeing, including the disparate impact of gender norms on sexual health and private relationships and the global dynamics of climate change and environmental crises caused by capitalist structures. In the context of sustained political assaults on Indigenous Latinx family structures, sustaining kinship structures takes on personal, cultural, and social implications. However, both within and outside of our communities, it is sometimes misrepresented that Latinx communities are uniformly and traditionally repressive when it comes to gender and sexuality. This narrative reflects the real implications of cis-heterosexist and patriarchal ideologies, including those upheld by certain aspects of the Catholic Church. However, it also erases the significance of historical and contemporary experiences of gender and sexual liberation within transnational Indigenous Latinx communities.

There are at least 65 Indigenous languages that have terms referring to non-binary gender identities. These typically signified a position in the community that encompassed both sexuality and gender, such as individuals born male who take on women’s social roles. In virtually all societies, they were understood as an included part of the community, often revered or eligible for advanced social standing. For example, Chumash tribes recognized “aqi” (Ventureño Chumash word for “third-gender people”) for thousands of years prior to the arrival of Europeans. The Chumash peoples are the stewards and Indigenous peoples of land that was previously Mexico and recolonized the United States. The previous Spanish, and sometimes Spanish Mexican, colonizers systemically assaulted the homes, lives, and lifeways of Native peoples. They made a particular target of the aqi. In Spanish, they renamed the third-gender people “joya” (or “olla”) which means jewel, because of their prized status to the Native communities, and also vessel, eliciting a derogatory association and justifying practices of inhumane torture and murder. Chumash scholar Deborah Miranda named this system gendercide and it is a common tactic in settler-colonialism.

Third-gender people play an important role in Chicanx, Indigenous Latinx, and Latinx communities throughout the United States and Latina America. Many Native communities have continued to operate their traditional customs, languages, and ways of knowing under the radar of colonizers. The Zapotec people, who are Indigenous to lands in southern Mexico, presently known as the state of Oaxaca, recognize a third gender, Muxes. They are an important part of the community’s traditions and culture. Festivals and celebrations honoring Muxes have also contributed to a transnational identity for Zapotecs. Festivals honoring Muxes are held in Oaxaca and in large migrant communities in the United States, like Los Angeles. As well, La Asociación Nacional de Comercio y Turismo LGBT (Mexican LGBT National Association of Commerce and Tourism) created Ruta Istmo (Istmo Route), the first touristic route in Oaxaca to highlight the Muxe identity. These efforts work to support the contemporary Zapoteca community and their ways of life. One Muxe performer, Lukas Avendaño, is displayed in Figure 4.4.1, in a long, short-sleeve black

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

4.4.2 https://socialsci.libretexts.org/@go/page/138205

and white dress, embroidered with red, purple, and yellow flowers. This is an example of the centrality of traditional culture and fashion to the practices of Muxes.

Figure 4.4.1: “Lukas Avendaño” by Mario Patinho, Wikimedia Commons is licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

Two-Spirit Identities and Pan-Indigenous Solidarity Given that both Indigenous spirituality and non-gender binary ways were stolen upon European invasion, Indigenous people from various tribes have come together to reconnect and build connections between these communities and experiences. This process contributed to the development of the term Two-Spirit in 1990 by Native people to talk about sexual and gender identities across tribal contexts. It was developed in part as a response to the widespread use of the term “berdache,” an adapted French word that was popularized by settler anthropologists and carries a dehumanizing stigma to imply a male prostitute (derived from the Arabic, “Bardaj,” meaning “captive” or “slave”). Two-Spirit is not a translation of any specific tribal term, but rather a way to communicate within an English-speaking context about the common commitment to decolonization and liberation for all Indigenous people.

The term Two-Spirit should be understood as complementary to LGBTQ, within the context of Indigenous communities. It does not replace tribally-specific identity labels, nor does it replace sexual orientation and gender identities exactly. For example, Two- Spirit people may have one or more tribal affiliations and may also identify as one or more LGBTQ identities. LGBTQ Native Americans were looking for a way to remove themselves from a culture that emphasizes sexuality over spirituality and a way to reconnect with their own tribal communities. Adopting the Two-Spirit term was the answer. The term is sometimes referenced more abstractly to indicate two contrasting spirits, such as “Warrior and Clan Mother” or “Eagle and Coyote.” Cherokee scholar, Qwo-Li Driskill describes his relationship between Two-Spiritedness, Queer and Trans Identity in his own tribal context:

I find myself using both the words “Queer” and “Trans” to try to translate my gendered and sexual realities for those not familiar with Native traditions, but at heart, if there is a term that could possibly describe me in English, I simply consider myself a Two-Spirit person. The process of translating Two-Spiritness with terms in white communities becomes very complex. I’m not necessarily “Queer” in Cherokee contexts, because differences are not seen in the same light as they are in Euroamerican contexts. I’m not necessarily “Transgender” in Cherokee contexts, because I’m simply the gender I am. I’m not necessarily “Gay,” because that word rests on the concept of men-loving-men, and ignores the complexity of my gender identity. It is only within the rigid gender regimes of white America that I become Trans or Queer.

The embedded Video 4.4.1 discusses in further depth the complexity of perspective among queer Natives with respect to culture, tradition, and holidays like Thanksgiving. To watch the video in full is 17 minutes and 42 seconds. The video presents an interpretation and perspective from one voice, which reflects the range of factors that influence decision-making about everyday activities for Native and Indigenous peoples. As you watch the video, please note the ways that Indigeneity impacts modern experiences.

Queer and Trans Migration Experiences

34

4.4.3 https://socialsci.libretexts.org/@go/page/138205

🧿 Content Warning: Physical and Sexual Violence. Please note that this section includes discussions of physical and sexual violence.

Gender and sexuality also profoundly shape the experiences of Indigenous Latinx and mestizo queer and trans migrants in the context of larger systems and structures. For instance, Manuel Guzmán defined “sexiles” as “those queer migrants leaving home/nation as a result of their sexuality.” For example, individuals may be experiencing repressive conditions, external violence, or family rejection due to sexual stigma and seek new opportunities with communities. Individuals may also immigrate to seek medical treatment, such as for HIV, or gender-affirming therapies and surgical procedures. Queer and trans communities are characterized by differential access for immigrants and citizens to cultural fields, political inclusion, and collective membership.

Queer and trans immigrants asylum seekers and refugees face persistent exclusion and barriers to migration. Gays and lesbians have been explicitly barred from immigrating to the U.S. including the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act, which disallowed “sexual deviants,” and remained in effect until 1990. Even after the outright ban was lifted, structural heterosexism continued to block queer and trans people. The ban on HIV-positive immigrants was in effect until 2010 and disparately affects queer and trans people. Similarly, until the federal Defense of Marriage Act was repealed in 2013, same-sex married couples were not recognized as families for immigration procedures. Today, LGBTQ people still face disparate barriers to adequate representation and may not have legal standing in their home countries to recognize important kinship ties.

Further, the violent and militarized system of U.S. immigration traumatizes and abuses asylum seekers, especially transgender migrants. Christina Madrazo sued the U.S. government for $15 million, due to being held in detention and allegedly raped by Lemar Smith twice in May of 2000. Because of a plea deal, his charges were reduced from felonies to misdemeanors, lowering his sentence from 42 years to 8 months. Chicanx and Latinx communities experience distinct forms of oppression, prompting some scholars and activists to further adapt terminology to reflect these differences. For example, the term cuir (queer) “registers the geopolitical inflection towards the south and from the peripheries, in counterpoint to colonial epistemology and Anglo-American historiography.”

Queer refers [..] to those who are able to evade interpretative unidirectionality, who are able to be unintelligible at first sight, those people outside of the simple models and frames of hegemonic representation, which is not very difficult to achieve in a g-local world that is presumed to be ‘white’ even though the majority of its inhabitants are not ‘white’.

You can review more about the complexity of queer and trans identities among Chicanx and Indigenous Latinx communities in Section 6.4: Jotería Frameworks and Scholarly Conversations. In Figure 4.4.2, a photo of London Pride is displayed with a group of activists holding a sign that says “Lesbian and Gay Immigration Group. Supporting LGBTI Asylum Seekers and Refugees,” along with various national and pride flags in hand. These types of intersectional organizations address the unique needs related to migration, gender, and sexuality.

Figure 4.4.2: “Pride in London 2016” by KTC, Wikimedia is licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

35

36

37

38

39

4.4.4 https://socialsci.libretexts.org/@go/page/138205

Footnotes

Maylei Blackwell, Floridalma Boj Lopez, and Luis Urrieta, “Special Issue: Critical Latinx Indigeneities,” Latino Studies 15, no. 2 (July 1, 2017): 126–37, https://doi.org/10.1057/s41276-017-0064-0.

Grace Chang, Disposable Domestics: Immigrant Women Workers in the Global Economy, 2nd ed. (Chicago, IL: Haymarket Books, 2016).

Chang, Disposable Domestics.

Rosa Elena Durán González, Mariana Juárez Moreno, and Lydia Raesfeld., “Violencia y Derechos de Las Niñas de Origen Indígena En El Municipio de San Felipe Orizatlán, Hidalgo,” Revista Universidad y Sociedad 13, no. 3 (June 2021): 56–68, http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2218-36202021000300056.

Úrsula Oswald-Spring, “Decolonizing Peace with a Gender Perspective,” Journal of Aggression, Conflict and Peace Research (2022): Ahead of Print, https://doi.org/10.1108/JACPR-01-2022-0678; Úrsula Oswald-Spring, “The Impact of Climate Change on the Gender Security of Indigenous Women in Latin America,” in Environment, Climate, and Social Justice, eds. Devendraraj Madhanagopal, Christopher Todd Beer, Bala Raju Nikku, and André J. Pelser (New York, NY: Springer, 2022): 117–42, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-1987-9_7.

Gloria González-López, Erotic Journeys: Mexican Immigrants and Their Sex Lives (Oakland, CA: University of California Press, 2005)

Maria Lugones, “The Coloniality of Gender,” in The Palgrave Handbook of Gender and Development, ed. Wendy Harcourt (New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016), 13–33.

Deborah A. Miranda, “Extermination of the Joyas: Gendercide in Spanish California,” GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 16, no. 1–2 (January 1, 2010): 253–84, https://doi.org/10.1215/10642684-2009-022.

Miranda, “Extermination of the Joyas”

Linda Tuhiwai Smith, Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples, 2nd ed. (London, UK: Zed Books, 2012).

Qwo-Li Driskill, "Stolen from Our Bodies: First Nations Two-Spirits/Queers and the Journey to a Sovereign Erotic," Studies in American Indian Literatures 16, no. 2 (2004): 50–64, https://dx.doi.org/10.1353/ail.2004.0020.

Eithne Luibheid and Lionel Cantu Jr, eds., Queer Migrations: Sexuality, U.S. Citizenship, and Border Crossings, 3rd ed. (Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 2005).

Manuel Guzmán, “Pa’la Escuelita Con Mucho Cuida’oy Por La Orillita’: A Journey through the Contested Terrains of the Nation and Sexual Orientation,” in Puerto Rican Jam: Rethinking Colonialism and Nationalism, eds. Frances Negrón-Muntaner and Ramón Grosfugel. (Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 1997): 209–28.

Luibheid and Cantu Jr., Queer Migrations.

Sayak Valencia Triana, “Teoría Transfeminista Para El Análisis de La Violencia Machista y La Reconstrucción No-Violenta Del Tejido Social En El México Contemporáneo,” Universitas Humanística, no. 78 (2014): 65–88, https://dx.doi.org/10.11144/Javeriana.UH78.ttpa.

Valencia Triana, “Teoría Transfeminista.”

This page titled 4.4: Gender, Sexuality, Migration, and Indigeneity is shared under a CC BY-NC 4.0 license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Mario Alberto Viveros Espinoza-Kulick & Melissa Moreno (ASCCC Open Educational Resources Initiative (OERI)) .

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

4.5.1 https://socialsci.libretexts.org/@go/page/166491

4.5: Conclusion

Summary

In this chapter, we applied theories and knowledge produced by Chicanx and Indigenous Latinx communities to describe the critical events, histories, intellectual traditions, contributions, lived experiences and social struggles of groups with a particular emphasis on agency and group affirmation. We learned more deeply about how settler colonialism, mestizaje (or mixed-race identity), and the complex dynamics of Indigeneity and migration affect politics, social movements, and cultural productions.

We explained and assessed how struggle, resistance, racial and social justice, solidarity, and liberation, as experienced, enacted, and studied by Chicanx and Indigenous Latinx people of the Americas, are relevant to current and structural issues such as communal, national, international, and transnational politics as, for example, in immigration, settler-colonialism, multiculturalism, and language policies. Indigenous peoples have been leaders in various movements for social change, equity, justice, and inclusion that benefit all sectors of society.

Also, in this chapter, we described and learned skills to actively engage with anti-racist and anti-colonial issues and the practices and movements in Chicanx and Indigenous Latinx communities to build a just and equitable society. This includes a clear awareness of the intersecting dynamics of race, gender, and sexuality that impact both migrants and Indigenous peoples in distinct ways.

Ancillary materials for this chapter are located in Section 11.4: Chapter 4 Resource Guide, which includes slides, media, writing and discussion prompts, and suggested assignments and activities.

Key Terms

Genocide: As defined by the United Nations, “any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

1. Killing members of the group; 2. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; 3. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in

part; 4. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; 5. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”

Native American: A member of any of the indigenous peoples of the Americas, often used to refer to those from the continental United States, Alaska, and Canada. Native Americans are the original inhabitants of these regions and have diverse cultures, languages, and traditions that vary among different tribes and nations. They have a unique historical and cultural connection to the land and have faced a history of colonization, displacement, and ongoing struggles for recognition, rights, and self-determination.

Decolonization: The multiple processes of resistance that work to end the dynamics of colonialism and establish, restore, and defend Indigenous sovereignty. It is important to note that decolonization is a political process that refers specifically to Indigenous sovereignty, and it is not a general term that captures all forms of social justice.

Anahuac: The Nahua word for Mesoamerica. Also called Abya Yala.

Indigeneity: A broad term used to refer to a sense of belonging and ties prior to colonization among people from a shared homeland. It is important to understand the distinctions between Chicanx, Indigenous Latinx, and Latinx Indigenites.

Indigenous Chicanx: A term that signifies being Indigenous to Anahuac (Mesoamerica), It is a self-identity category used by people, unlike Hispanic or Latinx which emerged from western institutions.

Xicanx: A preferred identity term for Chicanx involved in Indigenous movements there is often a preference to use the term Xicanx and not Chicanx. The Chi is the same sound as Xi, but Chi is the Spanish pronunciation and the Xi is the Indigenous one.

Indigenous Latinx: An umbrella term used to refer to Indigenous migrants to the United States from South and Central America, the Caribbean, and Mexico (for example, Maya, Mixteco, Purépecha, Taino, Zapoteco, etc.).

Critical Latinx Indigeneity: A term defined by Maylei Blackwell and colleagues as a lens to “critique enduring colonial logics and practices that operate from different localities of power as well as the physical, social, cultural, economic, and psychological

4.5.2 https://socialsci.libretexts.org/@go/page/166491

violence that often targets Indigenous Latinx peoples, including forms of state and police violence, cultural appropriation, economic exploitation, gender violence, social exclusion, and psychological abuse.”

Indigenismo: A term that emphasizes a celebration of Indigenous cultures and that Indigenous peoples are the foundation of contemporary Mexican culture, politics, and society. This is often deployed as an Aztec-centric celebration of the Indigenous past of the nation, which often serves to erase the present and future of the sixty-three Indigenous pueblos of Mexico and the millions of Indigenous peoples living around the world.

Indigenous: A label used to describe peoples who existed before colonization, and can be used to describe the Indigenous peoples of the Americas. Always use the capital I: “Indigenous” to designate the term as a proper noun.

Mestizas/os/xs: A diverse population that has a combination of mixed heritage, often including Indigenous lineage, along with a combination of African and/or European backgrounds.

Mestizaje (mixed-race identity): A term that emphasizes the multiple lineages that not only shape individual identity, but also the communities, cultures, languages, and traditions that we practice.

Post-racial society: The idea that all ethnic differences have fused, and it erases the realities of inequity and the importance of advocates calling for justice. For Indigenous peoples, reductive deployments of ethnic categorization can disrupt attempts for collective liberation.

Afro-Latinx: A term that describes people from Latin America of African descent.

Settler-colonialism: Instances of colonization where the colonizing groups seek to eradicate the people living in the territory they are colonizing and replace the Indigenous population with the settler population.

Colonization: The action of overtaking control of another group’s territory by force.

Attempted genocide: A project of trying to eradicate an entire population. This is accompanied by an ideologically rooted practice of dehumanization to justify and legitimize such actions.

De-Indianization: The processes that disrupt the livelihood of Indigenous peoples, through assaults on foodways, herbal medical resources, and cultural sensibilities.

Master narratives: Culturally sanctioned stories that benefit the status quo and members of privileged groups.

Sovereignty: Not a metaphor but rather the capacity and ability to exercise collective self-determination to govern one's people and land. North American Indians are the only group in the United States whose sovereignty is recognized in the Constitution of the United States. In the context of Indigenous people, sovereignty has often been undermined and determined by settler-colonial constructs.

Survivance: A term coined by Anishinaabe scholar and writer, Gerald Vizenor, refers to the collective process of survival, which carries forward the culture, peoples, and land beyond the individual.

Indigenization: Efforts supporting revitalization of Native languages, ancestral foodways, medical use, cultural burnings, midwifery traditions, dances, coming-of-age ceremonies, land acknowledgment, and more

Gendercide: The systematic violence that targets non-binary individuals in the pursuit of settler-colonial goals. Chumash scholar Deborah Miranda coined this term in the context of Spanish assaults on the aqi.

Two-Spirit: A term that was developed by Indigenous peoples to describe the shared experience of third gender people. Two-Spirit should only be used in reference to Indigenous peoples, and whenever possible, in conjunction with a more tribally specific term.

Sexiles: Queer migrants leaving their home/nation as a result of their sexuality.

This page titled 4.5: Conclusion is shared under a CC BY-NC license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Mario Alberto Viveros Espinoza-Kulick & Melissa Moreno (ASCCC Open Educational Resources Initiative (OERI)) .