La Raza Defends its Name, Literally

[Convert 54]

Originally Posted by quicoreed

As a bilingual white guy who was once pretty deeply involved with the local Colorado Chicano population, and was offered help to get a PhD within the CU Chicano Studies department (I turned down the offer), I worked closely with a number of Chicanos adn Latinos, some of them part of MeCha and NCLR. From that experience, I can make a few comments I hope will be enlightening.
1) what the article states about the various interpretations for "la Raza" is correct. It can mean a reference for a culture, or a race, and can be used with animals to mean "the breed", as in "what breed of dog is that?" (de que raza es este perro?). The meaning of the phrase can for some be unifying. I recommend you read this: Is The Phrase "La Raza" Racist? in which the author says:
"The images many people have of La Raza are of brown skinned, ethnocentric separatists. La Raza is seldom associated with the same mentality that justified the genocide and general oppression that is a legacy of the New World experience, and the heritage of La Raza. I will admit to enthocentricism any day. The fact is that having a conceit for La Raza today fulfills the mantra of those who condemn labels: We are all one. The phrase has been borrowed by various shades of brown people who celebrate their African, Asian, Native, and European blood with varying equality. There is no one I could marry who would make my children anything other than Raza. Having pride in La Raza means having pride in every continent. The dishes I make in my home have Spanish, Native, and African origins. La Raza is a melting pot of cosmology."

You will note that the author STILL says "phrase has been borrowed by various shades of brown people"--BROWN is key.

2) the word does not ALWAYS strictly have a racial connotation therefore. But the "raza" ALWAYS connotes the Latino ethnicity, and more importantly, the Mestizo or mixed blood people. Most Mexicans would probably not consider a pure-blood Native Americans as "La Raza", although they might be considered "bretheren", almost like cousins, so if Native American groups wanted to call themselves "raza", they wouldn't argue over it. However, white Spaniards, even though they speak Spanish (or Castellano to be precise) are NOT "Raza"--quite the opposite, they are connected with the "oppressors".

3) Not all Chicanos or Hispanics who use the term are divisive and racist. But MANY ARE. The use of the word in conjunction with other phrases reveals how the term implies a racial/ethnic divide between the Mestizos and the "whites", who are seen as dominant, oppressive "Oligarchy". Hence the recent video of the MeCha activist at a Tea Party rally with phrases like "you are too white to be an American, we are the real Americans, go back to Europe!" interspersed with Spanish phrases such as "Viva la Raza", or long live La Raza (the breed, people, race, of the Mestizos).
4) The Mexicans in particular use the term "la Raza" to connote that they are the product of what they call "la gran chingada", or "the great rape". I've heard them call themselves "hijos de la chingada" or sons of the rape, implying that the White Europeans conquered and violated them, both figuratively and quite literally (hence the mixed blood).

Conclusion: it is not fair to always assume that because someone uses the phrase "la Raza" that it implies they are being racist. But in the same what that blacks often call each other "Ni----" and that implies shared victimized status and unity, "La Raza" carries the EXACT SAME MEANING and is therefore intrinsically divisive.

talk about opening a dead horse thread on yer first post.
To sum it up, I dont think we care.

[Jayarcy]

There are other words they could have chosen to mean 'people,' or 'communities.' but it's telling that they chose the one which can also be translated as race. Just a coincidence? I doubt it.

[Avengerfire]

Wow, quite a necromance here.

[mkfarnam]

Originally Posted by Jayarcy

There are other words they could have chosen to mean 'people,' or 'communities.' but it's telling that they chose the one which can also be translated as race. Just a coincidence? I doubt it.

The name "La Raza" was choosen for a specific reason. It's meant to stand for "The Race' the one and only. But when accusation are thrown at them, they can just re-route the definition.
If they were so concerned about being called the racist race, they'd change the name.

Now, 2 years after this thread was started, La Raza seems to be in hidding.

[Mouser]

Originally Posted by mkfarnam

Now, 2 years after this thread was started, La Raza seems to be in hidding.

The big money behind La Raza is George Soros
if not for his deep pockets they could never come up
with this kind of cash

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/i....asp?indid=977

Soros and his foundations have had a hand in funding such noteworthy leftist organizations as the American Constitution Society for Law and Policy; the Tides Foundation; the Tides Center; the National Organization for Women; Feminist Majority; the American Civil Liberties Union; People for the American Way; Alliance for Justice; NARAL Pro-Choice America; America Coming Together (http://www.discoverthenetwork.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6708 - broken link); the Center for American Progress (http://www.discoverthenetwork.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6709 - broken link); Campaign for America's Future; Amnesty International (http://www.discoverthenetwork.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6185 - broken link); the Sentencing Project; the Center for Community Change; the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People Legal Defense and Educational Fund; Human Rights Watch; the Prison Moratorium Project; the Malcolm X Grassroots Movement (http://www.discoverthenetwork.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7318 - broken link); the National Lawyers Guild; the Center for Constitutional Rights; the Coalition for an International Criminal Court (http://www.discoverthenetwork.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6984 - broken link); The American Prospect (http://www.discoverthenetwork.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7074 - broken link); MoveOn.org; Planned Parenthood; the Nation Institute; the Brennan Center for Justice; the Ms. Foundation for Women; the National Security Archive Fund; the Pacifica Foundation; Physicians for Human Rights; the Proteus Fund; the Public Citizen Foundation; the Urban Institute; the American Friends Service Committee; Catholics for a Free Choice; Human Rights First; the Independent Media Institute; MADRE; the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund; the Immigrant Legal Resource Center; the National Immigration Law Center; the National Immigration Forum; the National Council of La Raza; the American Immigration Law Foundation; the Lynne Stewart Defense Committee; and the Peace and Security Funders Group.

Apart from the more than $5 billion that Soros' foundation network has donated to leftist groups like those listed above, Soros personally has made campaign contributions to such notable political candidates as Charles Rangel, Al Franken, Tom Udall, Joe Sestak, and Sherrod Brown.


Click on the La Raza link you'll find neat stuff like this

NCLR’s major policy positions also include the following:

• It supports access to driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants (http://www.nclr.org/content/policy/detail/1060/ - broken link).
• It opposes the REAL ID Act, (http://www.nclr.org/content/policy/detail/29762/ - broken link) which requires that all driver’s license and photo ID applicants be able to verify they are legal residents of the United States, and that the documents they present to prove their identity are genuine. According to La Raza, this law “opens the door to widespread discrimination and civil rights violations.”
• It opposes the Clear Law Enforcement for Criminal Alien Removal Act (CLEAR), which would empower state and local law-enforcement authorities to enforce federal immigration laws. La Raza argues this would “result in higher levels of racial profiling, police misconduct, and other civil rights violations.”
• It lobbies for racial and ethnic preferences (affirmative action) and set-asides in hiring, promotions, and college admissions.
• It supports bilingual education and bilingual ballots.
• It supports voting rights for illegal aliens.
• It supports stricter hate-crime laws.
• It opposes (http://209.85.165.104/custom?q=cache:eBbudpPuR3EJ:www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp%3FID%3D11862+%22national+council+o f+la+raza%22&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=17 - broken link) the Aviation Transportation and Security Act requiring that all airport baggage screeners be U.S. citizens.
• It opposed (http://capwiz.com/nclr/issues/alert/?alertid=9075406 - broken link) President Bush’s signing of the "Secure Fence Act of 2006” which authorized 700 miles of new border fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border.

[Convert 54]

I must say, when I first saw the post and that JDubsmom had posted it I thoughtshe was back and I was excited....but allas it was not to be,
I miss JDM

[malamute]

Originally Posted by quicoreed

Conclusion: it is not fair to always assume that because someone uses the phrase "la Raza" that it implies they are being racist. But in the same what that blacks often call each other "Ni----" and that implies shared victimized status and unity, "La Raza" carries the EXACT SAME MEANING and is therefore intrinsically divisive.

You're right but the distinction has to be how "la raza" is used in a country like Mexico versus how it's used to divide people in the USA.

In Mexico, the term can be used to mean "the Mexican people" and wouldn't be racist in that context and could be something like "We the People of the United States" which of course also doesn't mean to imply all the people of the world. In Mexico the word "raza" can be used like that - to show distinction and unity of the people of that country - (including whites) and in Mexico it doesn't imply victim status.

Of course in Mexico "la raza mexicana" doesn't mean to include citizens of the USA or any other country, just like "we the People of the United States" doesn't mean "the Whole World". So even when it's used to mean "people" it only means people in a limited way and is still unifying within a group - either the whole country like in Mexico or a limited group of people in the USA with strong ties to Mexico.

And inclusive words have to be accepted by the group as a whole - not too many Chippewa or Cherokee Indians believed that they were ever ruled over or dominated by the tribes of Mexico, not even the Aztecs. They're no more kin of each other than are Germans or Swedes or Ethiopians and Kenyans or Koreans and Vietnamese.

I think the next step for La Raza is when they notice the nice casinos the Indians of the USA run - and they're going to start demanding their cut in the tribal money. There usually is a catch when people you never saw before start insisting they're your long lost second cousin and they're eyeing up what you have.

[Opyelie]

Hmm, I do believe I recall La Raza proclaiming themselves to be the "American Palestinians" at one time and exhorting their supporters to follow that example..........USA is their "promised land" that has been taken from them apparently - so the end justifies ANY means.........