Mexican-American History in the Greater American Context

My RBA topic will argue that Mexican-American history has largely been overlooked in the general American conscience, despite its richness and significance to modern society. I will aim to use both sources regarding Mexican-American history and introductory sources to general American history to demonstrate just how neglected this subtopic of American development has become. In addition, I will try to explain why this may be the case, again using the sources that directly discuss this history.

Here is a link to my mind map for this topic:

Mexican-American History Mind Map

Research Topic Reflection

My research topic will focus on the Mexican-American historical narrative during the early onset of the Cold War and how containment rhetoric undermined early activist movements for civil rights. The relevance of my research topic is that Mexican-Americans were one of the many subgroups targeted by mainstream politics as “subversive”, yet it seems as though this has been overlooked in many historical accounts.

Other scholars, such as Mario T. García and Zaragosa Vargas, have made attempts at recollecting the primary accounts of Mexican-Americans and Mexican immigrants during the early 1930s through the 1960s. I have come to understand through their works that Mexican-American activists in particular were methodically antagonized by anti-communist groups that sought to find any “subversives” within American society. Additionally, García has noted that the Mexican-American activist movement was unique in that it was relatively decentralized in its efforts and goals, which may have also played a part in its early struggles against anti-communists. There was no singular leader or party that took charge, which led to the splintering of the movement from small-scale efforts such as local elections to broader lobbying such as the initiative of one particular subset to end the federal Bracero program because of alleged wage reductions. My research will seek to specifically argue that this growing generation of activists has been significantly overlooked by historians despite their lasting impact on American society as well as the similarities to other marginalized groups that were well-documented during the Cold War and the subsequent Civil Rights Movement.

Urban Anxiety and the Application of Cultural and Political Strategy in Urban Spaces

In his article, “Disaster and decentralization: American cities and the Cold War,” Matthew Farish discusses how anxiety surrounding the threat of urban disaster emerged Post-World War II in response to the nuclear destruction of Hiroshima and resulted in the popularity of suburbanization and the later attempt to change the nature of American cities.

Farish highlights characteristics of the literature and films of the early post-war era to illustrate his point:

Interestingly, the ideal post-nuclear community in many science fiction novels and films was either a small town or another type of contained, purposeful settlement, such as a college or monastery… Not one strategist or government planner, MacCannel points out, ‘has envisaged a post-attack rebuilding by people who never benefitted much from American society, or quite understood what America was all about, that is, by people who lived at a disadvantage on the margins of society.’

The popular depiction of a “contained, purposeful” “post-nuclear community” hints at widespread recognition of the newfound importance of strategy in the context of the built environment. Farish argues that this imposition of careful planning and organization arose out of a pervasive fear of nuclear attack and broader fears about the implications of such an event for the nation.  Farish points to a desire to keep separate the central city and the suburbs, which were viewed as a return to pastoral small-town life, even as concrete plans emerged for the reorganization of American settlements. The choice of “a small town” as a setting for the novel or film narrative supports this idea. In an ideal post-nuclear world, the centralized city is eliminated, and the people remaining–individuals of admirable and traditional American characteristics–can build an ideal society in a non-urban, decentralized setting and survive through the traumatic event.  The “post-nuclear community” of the novels and films of the time leave out a significant portion of the American population: “people who lived at a disadvantage on the margins of society.” This omission is indicative of a prevalent binary categorization between good and bad that Farish recognizes as characteristic of the American rhetoric during the Cold War era. A separation existed in the minds of the American people between the dangerous city and the safe and moral suburb that motivated growing popularity of suburbia. Urban centers were considered more vulnerable to nuclear attack, and urban dwellers were considered more vulnerable to the persuasions of communism.

The anxiety surrounding urban disaster driven by the images of Hiroshima was confirmed, in a way, by the events of 9/11: thousands of Americans died, and the Twin Towers, symbols of American ingenuity and technological prowess, crumbled to the ground. The proliferation of images of those towers falling now haunt the American public in much the same way that images of Hiroshima did Post-WWII, though they have a different effect.  Images of 9/11 are used by politicians, like George W. Bush, to make Americans amenable to the strategic elements of the so-called “war on terrorism” like military action and increased covert surveillance of American citizens.  They serve as a reminder of our vulnerability to outside forces inspiring a variety of responses, such as the increasing popularity of islamophobia and general xenophobia in connection with white nationalism.

Weapons of Mass Destruction, Domestic Geography, and Suburbanization in Post-War America

In the article Disaster and decentralization: American cities and the Cold War, Matthew Farish addresses the competing influences of atomic weaponry, containment, and an increasingly intense look at domestic geography, on the rise of suburbia. Farish writes that, “As Paul Boyer has documented, journalists, science fiction authors, religious leaders and concerned scientists all rapidly ‘transmuted the devastation of Hiroshima into visions of American cities in smoldering ruins’, inscribing concentric circles of destruction over various urban topographies (see Figure 1).36 ‘The clustered buildings and congested areas of our great cities’, Hanson Baldwin wrote, ‘are natural “area” targets of immense vulnerability for all the mass killers of the age’; while the atomic scientist and hydrogen bomb proponent Edward Teller described them as ‘deathtraps’.” Farish emphasizes the fear that the U.S had of their enemies acquiring and using atomic weaponry against them. This in turn led scientists to look at the most at risk areas in the United States, which are cities. The layout of U.S. cities, with the disorganization, chaotic nature, and high density was extremely concerning because a single localized, central strike could do significant damage. Alternate city layouts were discussed, from a cellular to a linear approach. However, the conflation of safety and migration out of city centers led to a large immigration from the city to suburbia, primarily by the people who were socioeconomically able to afford it, which were white, middle class families. 

The imagery of the Twin Towers falling is representative of the fear that scientists had over the impact of a large scale strike to a city center. The Twin Towers, a symbol of American might, were not only located in the center of the largest U.S. city but also massive structures with thousands of people working inside. The Twin Towers are a city within a city, the epitome of city cluster and extreme density. Their downfall, and the panic and destruction that ensued, confirmed all the fears contained in Farish’s article.

Race, Sexuality and Cold War Rhetoric: Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt

Popular streaming services like Netflix are known to have some of the most well-known shows in popular media today, along with a wide array of original streaming content. One of these popular shows is Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt. The show primarily follows the life of Kimberly Schmidt, as she navigates life in the Big Apple, after having been held captive for years in Indiana by a reverend claiming to protect her from an impending apocalypse. Additionally, this show also covers other side plots such as her gay roommate Titus Andromedon, and her boss-turned-friend Jacqueline. Many of these narratives in the show echo or critique various rhetoric utilized within the Cold War.

Titus Andromedon’s story showcases the reemergence of anti-homosexual rhetoric in the United States, which was often commonplace during the Cold War era. Originally born as Ronald Wilkerson, Titus fled his home state and changed his name in order to escape the negative comments that he would face there for not following heterosexual norms. Like some during the Cold War period, Titus even goes as far as marrying a woman in order to act as if he was conforming to the “ideals” of society.

Kimmy’s boss Jacqueline also presents another narrative that ties into Cold War rhetoric. We are introduced to Jacqueline as a wealthy Caucasian living a very lavish lifestyle. Everything seems perfectly normal, and she seems to portray the “ideal” lifestyle that was advocated in the Cold War era. As the show progresses, we begin to learn more of her back story, and it is revealed that Jacqueline was actually born on a Lakota reservation under the name Jackie Lynn. Essentially, Jackie felt that she had to conform to that normative lifestyle in order to feel socially competent which echoes the feelings of many during the era. If one did not look like the norm, they were not the norm, and often became excluded from the narrative.

As we can see, Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt presents us with various narratives of trying to become the norm, a common occurrence in the Cold War period. These stories of race and homosexuality as being reasons for not being included in the popular narrative still occur today unfortunately. Other narratives in the show such as ones of masculinity and the suppression of feminism also echo how popular culture today still has some of this Cold War rhetoric and resentment lingering.

Image Source

The Rhetoric of Containment in the Suburbs and the Inner City

 

In a speech at the South by Southwest education conference in 2015, Betsy DeVos stated that many Republicans did not support school choice, remarking that “Many Republicans in the suburbs likes the idea of education choice as a concept, right up until it means that poor kids from the inner cities might invade their schools. That’s when you’ll hear the sentiment ‘well, it’s not really a great idea to have poor minority kids come to our good suburban schools’ though they’ll never actually say those words aloud.” DeVos’s statements comment upon the “poor minority kid” narrative that is often used as a justification of racism rather than an explanation.

Much of the containment culture of the Cold War Era rested upon the perception of liberty and freedom as opposed to an actual need for liberty and freedom. In a similar way, accepting the narrative of the poor inner-city kid is much easier than questioning capitalism as a structure and how it contributes to racial wealth disparities. Additionally, the concept of school choice would seem to be inherently capitalist, yet some Republicans do not support it because the perception of freedom is more important to them than the actual implementation freedom and choice, just as it was during the Cold War era.

The use of the word “invade” harkens back to a fear of communist invasion and infiltration into American society. In both the Cold War era and the post 9/11 era, housing divisions ensured that wealth and resource disparities persisted between racial groups. As we read for homework, federal funds were infused into the expansion of single family homes so that poorer whites could have access to the idealized suburban lifestyle, while this lifestyle remained inaccessible to people of color. Since capitalism necessitates the existence of a bottom group, wealth and resource distribution in the form of more integrated schooling would lead to the downfall of this intentionally racialized division. The containment of both communism and supposed minority invasion ensure the stability and security of suburban white people and ensure the success of containment culture.

 

A Reflection on the Containment Rhetoric of the Empire of Japan and the German Reich

A Reflection on the Containment Rhetoric of the Empire of Japan and the German Reich

The television series, The Man in the High Castle, illustrates much of the internalized rhetoric of Cold War-style containment culture, though via the intriguing avenue of a cold war between two very striking, dystopian powers: the Japanese Pacific States and the Greater Nazi Reich. Each is a satellite state of its respective mother country, the former of the Empire of Japan, the latter the German Reich. The show is set in the early 1960s and revives the tired trope of a hypothetical Axis victory in World War II, but in a novel context; within this cacotopia, there are segments of a newsreel being disseminated (unclear by or for whom) that contain the viewer’s reality: the defeat of the Axis Powers in 1945. The audience follows the stories of several characters, some of whom are loyal to their respective states, some of whom are engaged in active resistance.

Such a story lends itself, almost aggressively, to analysis within the framework of containment. There are the obvious parallels to draw with the competing Soviet and American powers, but far more interesting is the backdrop, a parody of 1950s America. In the Greater Nazi Reich, we see the happy, traditional families, nearly indistinguishable from their real-life American counterparts in the same era. There exists the same confinement of women to the domestic sphere, children to immutable gender roles, father as breadwinner at the head of the table. At school, there is the pledging to the flag, the familiar stars and stripes replaced by a swastika on stripes. We experience the embarrassment and guilt of a woman who suffers from barrenness, just as one may have in the same era in the United States. The American aspiration for the ideal nuclear family, with all its attendant baggage, is the unavoidable frame of reference. Then there are the even more outlandish aspects, perhaps the most striking of which is the extermination of all mentally or physically “defective” individuals (one of whom is our Nazi protagonist’s son). This extreme homogenization of society demands reflection and consideration; can we draw from it inferences regarding our own American cookie-cutter households? Of course, the atrocities of the Nazi government in the program are far beyond those of the United States, but there is no doubt that the era’s American cultural aesthetic does inform the setting. Indeed, there may be no better way to attract widespread critical attention to American social practices of the 1950s and 1960s than by creating a dystopian story with such clear but confused parallels.

Image:

“The Man in the High Castle.” The Studio Exec, thestudioexec.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/man_in_the_high_castle-e1478969669463.jpg. Accessed 1 Oct. 2017.

Containing Immigration: Cold War Rhetoric in Trump’s Repealing of DACA

A couple of weeks ago, the Trump administration announced that they were ending the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program (DACA) started under the Obama administration to give undocumented minors who were brought to the US at a very young age the ability to gain legal status in the US. Trump had promised that he would end the program and he finally kept his promise despite bipartisan opposition to his decision.

One of the main arguments against immigration is the fact that immigrants are seen as “freeloaders” who benefit from government programs and help despite the fact that they don’t file a 1040 with the IRS. This goes directly against the capitalist idea of getting what you work for. In Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ address dealing with the end of DACA, he draws on this sentiment as an explanation for the administration’s decision.

“The DACA program…essentially provided a legal status for recipients for a renewable two-year term, work authorization and other benefits, including participation in the social security program…”

Many nativists, many of whom make up Trump’s electoral base, believe that the ability to stay and work in the US is being given away to undeserving immigrants. Additionally, the Cold War distinction of American versus Un-American is very clear here as well when immigrants are called “illegal aliens.” The recipients of the DACA program were too young to even form memories when they were brought to the US. This country is all they know and are as American as can be.

Additionally, the Cold War distinction of American versus Un-American is very clear when these Dreamers are called “illegal aliens.” The recipients of the DACA program were too young to be able to decide whether or not they wanted to come to the US or not. This country is all they know and these children are as American as can be. This type of rhetoric is especially apparent in this address but has been a common theme in Trump’s campaign. His campaign was riddled with Cold War-style rhetoric, starting from his very first speech:

“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best…They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us” (Trump).

The idea of Mexico sending criminals and rapists to corrupt the US brings up memories of the USSR sending its spies to relay information back to the Kremlin and corrupt American “family values.” One would think that this outdated rhetoric would have little effect 30 years after the end of the Cold War, but as the last election taught us, the world is a strange place.

 

 

Beckwith, Ryan Teague. “’We Cannot Admit Everyone.’ Read a Transcript of Jeff Sessions’ Remarks on Ending the DACA Program.” TIME, 5 Sept. 2017, time.com/4927426/daca-         dreamers-jeff-sessions-transcript/.

Sessions, Jefferson. “Remarks on Ending the DACA Program.” TIME. Remarks on Ending   the DACA Program, 5 Sept. 2017, Washington, White House.

Trump, Donald J. “Presidential Announcement Speech.” TIME. June 16 2016