Transcripts For CSPAN3 Latino Americans U.S. Politics 20240714

Learn more about the 1980 refugee act today at 5 00 p. M. Eastern. You are watching American History tv. Next, historians discuss the in u. S. Latino americans political history. This was part of a two day Purdue University conference. Is jaime sanchez, junior grade i will be guiding the discussion this afternoon. This is a theme that is central to the idea of remaking american political history. This is not to say that no one has ever thought of or written in americanlatinos history. About rethinking what political historians Pay Attention to. Asked anlier panel, we essential question. There was a real barrier to what organizations and individuals are labeled as political or diplomatic actors. This cannot this panel seeks to shift the conversation. Fire of 19th century warfare, latinos have been part and parcel of modern america social fabric with well over 150 years of history in the United States. Latinos have made an indelible mark in u. S. Politics. As founders of longstanding civic and political organizations and the protests protest movements of the 1960s and 1970s. Latinos made u. S. Politics their own. In greeting the major synthetic in reading the major synthetic work of little history, we are hardpressed to find much representation of latino experiences at all in mainstream legal history. It seems as though this conference is as auspicious an occasion as any to make the case for latino political history. Traditional political history narrative, written by an earlier generation of historians, have emphasized elite white men as the movers and shakers of u. S. Politics. A its revival, we have seen more critical approach to race in formal race and formal politics. Illustrateen done to the essential importance of africanamericans in political history, scholarship has done little to move beyond the blackwhite racial binary that dominates the narrative. Other fields have done much better in their incorporate incorporation of latinos, including urban history, immigration, labor history, and studies of the welfare state. In the context of city politics, urban history on cities such as chicago and los angeles are some of the best examples we have for any analysis of latino politics. What about the national . Where is put a good history in this intellectual conversation . This panel is a rallying call for political historians to rethink our engagement. In calling for a new Research Agenda of capacious and comprehensive latino political history, we must ask questions about what research has been done, is currently on the table or yet to be pursued. Is there such a thing as latino political history . If so, what does it look like . What does mainstream logical history stand to lose by not including Latino Actors and institutions . How would incorporating latinos into the discourse change the field and larger narrative . We will discuss some of the most pressing issues concerning the role of latinos in the american political past. Joining us today in making the case for political history are some of the leading voices in this field. Rosina is an historian of Latino History. Comparative studies of race and ethnicity. She is the author of an american language, the history of spanish in the United States. It is applicable history of the Spanish Language in the United States from the incorporation of the mexican succession to world war ii. Some discussion of the following decades in presentday concerns. It was published in 2018 by the university of california press. She is an associate professor at princeton in the department of history. Our next panelist is an american of borderlands. His first book, standing on inmon ground, was published 2013 by Harvard University press and focused on the arizona borderlands since world war ii. He is now completing a book about hispanic conservatism to be published in 2020 by ecco press. He is the director of northwestern universitys latina and Latino History. Benjamin Francis Allen is an historian and teacher. In his forthcoming but, the rise of the latino vote, it examines how elected officials and Party Insiders attempted to forge Mexican Americans, Puerto Ricans and cubans into a nationwide political constituency, a prophetess a process that proved pivotal. It is due out in september of the share by Harvard University press. September of this year by Harvard University press. He is currently assistant professor of history and court nader of social Science Education at western carolina university. Jaimey, my name is sanchez junior i am a ph candidate at princeton grade my current at princeton. Host i am the organizer and moderator of todays roundtable discussion. We will try to cover as much ground as possible during our short time here and we will save time at the end for questions. With that said, we should get started in making the case for Latino History. The first question is what is latino political history . What is the most interesting issue in this field for you . Thank you for organizing this. See latino put a good history as a broad category that includes many different fields and ties together issues that happen and remain important to the National Politics of United States. While Many Political history see more recent focus on immigration. History beginsl in the 19th century. I think it is crucial to tie what has largely been considered legal local stories into the larger formation of the nation. Book, the applicable history of Mexican Americans includes how those who came american citizens participated in the u. S. Clinical system. Explain how these u. S. Political system. By participating in politics in spanish, many became devoted and patriotic u. S. Citizens. There is a lot more work to be done about their political involvement in the ways those Political Parties recognize that they were there. Were giving the money and funding to make sure they were involved in applicable process. In the 20th century, latino politics revolved around increasing presentation, immigration, and civil rights. While ethnic mexicans, Puerto Ricans and cubans may have been cognizant of one another and supportive of one anothers efforts, there is little evidence that their struggle is one in the same great it is the potential misnomer that yields one of the most interesting historical questions at this time. How does a latino political entity come to be . We have had a good start. There is much more to uncover about this process and about where we are today in the ways we look at the latino population. Hello, everyone. A lot ofargely echo what rosina said. Politics andtino history would stretch back to the 19th century and include a whole range of issues. That suggests that a necessity to have a vision of what it also the need to integrate latino and american political history. I did think the title of the panel, making the case for latino political history, is a little curious because my First Response was, why wouldnt you have latino politics and american clinical history . It was curious to me that there is a need to make a case for it or something. It made me wonder about the longer history of american political history that has maybe excluded it that would necessitate its inclusion or necessitate its panelists are panelist making a case for it because there must have been some chasm in the beginning of american clinical history in the beginning of american political history. As two separate things. The main two things i want to highlight, the difference between latino political history and a history of latino politics. Inino political history is large degree concerned with partisan Political Behavior and the involvement of latinos in the Democratic Party or the Republican Party or a third party. The history of latino politics strugglea much longer for inclusion and american political life. I dont just mean in terms of the parties but record asian, civil rights recognition, civil rights, access to property and jobs and education. I would think all of those things as part of the history of latino politics. Historypart of latino and American History for a long time. Within thethat american political history and the history of latinos in the United States, histories of the involvement of latinos in partisan politics over a long period of time is largely lacking. There are individual books, the breadandbutter of the field has been community studies. We will talk about books in a minute but studies of texas and california. In those places, historians have edward,t someone like for whom it was important to register latino voters in los angeles in the mid20th century. That is a story that gets told but it is not part of a much longer history of the involvement of latinos in partisan politics. Direction thejor field of Latino History will move in soon, i hope. So, the story of latino political history and its involvement in american political history will come together more. What i will say reinforces some of that. In thinking about what most interests me, i am reminded of pinahings that albert junior said in 1963. On thesell insisting peoples americanism, he demanded that Mexican Americans would probably organize themselves as a distinct minority. If the irish in boston, the italians in new york can do it, soak at the mexican people of the United States. So good so could you so could the mexican people of the United States. For me, his remarks would be part of latino politics and political history and developed as a project of ethnic soulsearching. Latinos asnique to they unfolded. The search for political inclusion that is questions about jobs, access, patronage. In the first matter, he called to raise questions well beyond texas. Organizations capable of wielding power across the vast expanse of the nations political communities. Attempted to mobilize thesels who claim questions are linked to the second half of his remarks. Quest for recognition and representation. Latino politics emerged in an unequal dialogue with the white elites from both major parties who support was needed to sponsor the project of integrating all of these communities and mobilizing them for particular causes. Most often the need to fulfill some kind of destiny of a group nationwide. The question has to be asked about how these party elites, including u. S. President s, use their abilities to reward or withhold, to influence the larger construction of the political latino political community. A necessity of aligning those visions of community with an everchanging set of candidate ideology that i find so important in latino political history. Jaime there are a lot of interesting themes that we have heard from you three regarding ethnicity and the complications it brings, the earlier 19th of latinoigins Political Engagement from the getgo. I think all of us would like to hear about your interest your interventions in this historical endeavor. Could you tell us about your most recent work in the field of latino political history or the history of latino politics and how it is going . I am very excited to say my first book is called the. Ise of the latino vote i examined how Mexican Americans, or to reagans and cubans came to be seen Puerto Ricans and cubans came to be seen. Vote, nord the latino was the emergence of an accepted ethnicity in the American Life fromoduct of a topdown washington bureaucrats. Network ofn 1960, a political activists from grassroots activists up to u. S. President s, spanishspeaking americans, as they first called them, into a single constituency. The architects of latino politics devised new programs and platforms but relationships with each other and collaborated elaborated ideas of what the peoples common needs were that were once reflective of conditions on the ground. How they formed new organizations and divide new ways of distributing power among their populations that were quite unequal. Mined theow they ambiguity, whether they were a Coalition Building effort or seeking to transcend the National Origins and pursue the creation of something new, a new community. It was this Creative Action until a repudiation of colorblindness that drew both of their parties, liberal and conservative, into this self reinforcing consensus that spanishspeaking americans, later hispanics, later latinos, constituted a statistical population. These activists and their elite patrons transcended the nations blackandwhite binary and pushed the United States into multicultural politics. Even as they constructed the latino vote coming into existence, a National Community and identity, the process of the work to undermine the stability of that latino political identity. The makers of the latino vote were dependent on party elites to support this project. Powerful interests often thought more to control rather to empower the constituency. No surprise there. Party leaders spoke of party if acacia but when it came down to it party unification, but when it came down to it, they often ready to divide. Exacerbated internal hierarchies in the latino political community. Independent latino power was a much more elusive thing. Geraldo i am finishing a book right now about the history of hispanics in the Republican Party and republican hispanics and since about the 1960s, it is important to say that we are calling on these voters these voters hispanics this is what republicans call themselves for all kinds of reasons that we can get into. I know that is not exactly, you into inon academia to call them hispanics. Question is why . Why do hispanics vote for republicans . This is the first question i am always asked. It is a bit of a curiosity to many people. Andnted to explain why whenever that question is asked of me, it is always with a very surprised tone that donald trump could have one as much as 30 of the hispanic vote or in the 2018 midterms, ted cruz or rick scott won 40 of the hispanic vote. It is also always followed by surprise. It is always expressed as a surprise. It should not be a surprise because if you look at the Republican Party and hispanic voters over the past 50 or 60 thes, especially since reelection of Richard Nixon in 1972, the percentage of hispanics who have voted for the Republican Party has been around a third consistently. Over a 50year period, the of ican party has built has built and hispanic voting base. If you compare that with africanamerican voters, at the same time period, if you graph these things, they are going in opposite directions. At the same time the africanamerican support of the Republican Party plummets, hispanics have shot upward. There is a relationship between those two facts, i think. I wanted to explain the long baseopment of the hispanic , republican base. Correct what i have come to see as misunderstandings about republican hispanics. The first is that their conservatism must be motivated by their catholicism and traditional family values. I am not denying that is part of it but if we hang all of hispanic conservatism on that, we are missing a whole bunch. Catholicism is more complicated than just conservatism. There is kind of social justice catholicism. Nch of i am thinking of the liberation theology adjusts, for example ists, for example. The other is, they must be cubans. Dismiss weo cannot dismiss florida because it is a critical swing state. We cannot dismiss it but it allows us to ignore lots of hispanicains of conservatism that are just as important. It was more complicated than just catholicism among cubans from my grandpa who is a mix of panamanian, colombian, and filipino. He lives in tucson, arizona, which is a predominantly exit can american place and he served in the military predominantly mexicanamerican place and he served in the military and voted for reagan for the first time minere he was a silver when reagan was running in 1980 and was promising to put more money back in his paycheck so my grandfather voted for republican the first time in 1980. He is not cuban. He is catholic, but never observed his faith. I do not know the last time he went to church was. When writing my first book, i wrote about a Department Store owner, a mexicanamerican Department Store owner in tucson was staunchly catholic. He was not cuban. His political upbringing was territorialrizonas politics. He was a businessman. He did not have a union in his store because he thought his employees were all happy and they did not need a union. He hated cesar chavez. It let me down the path of wondering what the world of identityrepublicans was like. How political identity has developed over a long period of time is important because it will help us stop scratching our heads and grasping in the dark for all of these reasons that hispanics would vote for a republican and then wanting to complicate these two main ideas about cuban nationality and catholicism as being the two things that republican identity amongst hispanics are all about. Those are the things that let me down this path. The beginning of my second book project and it came out of my first book project and a larger sense trade when i teach comparative ethnicity, there is a lot of discussion about native americans in the 19 century borderlands. Then they kind of disappear and a lot of the 20thcentury literature. Desire with this book is to trace that longer history and to do it by looking in terms of the ways that the federal government and state governments had jurisdiction over individuals who were neither native americans or Mexican Americans. They have very different timetables as it relates to citizenship. I am going with my second project. If people have more questions, i can answer them. I am finishing an article that examines the language minority extension to the Voting Rights act in 1975 and it uses a broad range of documents that include theressional records, and the commission on civil rights. This Research Uncovers the ways that congress was working through the categorization of latinos in the u. S. I am more of a 19th century historian. Century historians i am enjoying it but it is very different for me. At the same time, that more restrictive immigration legislation against mexicans were being pushed through congress and being encouraged. While immigration was dominating actmedia, the Voting Rights extension offers evidence that the federal government also solid tinos as citizens saw latinos as citizens. And there into that is a separate case that is happening at the same time. It does not come into play until 1978. To allow interpreters into bilingual courtrooms. To allow for courtrooms to become bilingual and have interpreters in there as well. For is it that allows language minorities to be a categorization that would not blackyone who is but a person of color . Americanerican, asian as well as latinos, specifically meaning Mexican Americans and puerto rican. Current this rotation is about the institutional history of the d c and unlike the dnc, and unlike the representation of africanamericans, it is not until the 1970s were you even have conversations within the organization to think about hiring some sort of latino outreach representative. It is shocking to think that it was not until the late 1970s where you have conversations about National Democratic outreach to latinos. Thesek if we look at , there isnstitutions a serious lack in the scholarship and the basic facts of president ial elections. Course, thisof will be my segue into the next the engagement between nc is very touching go touch and go. In chicago and california, you have independent led and because i formal relationships with the National Party fundraising for jfk. Thinkis some work and i that influences my perspective of things in sing in evolution in seeing an evolution of latinos in the national Democratic Party. What are some of the key texts that have informed your approach to the history of latinos in u. S. Politics . I think this is a good way to discuss ways in which we can diversify our syllabi. Geraldo i have lots of different answers. Writtenay, every book in the field is an important touchstone for me because i think all of them pick up on parts of this story. At the same time, nothing picks up i would not point to any single thing as the political history of latinos writ large. The 1987 book politics throughout that from to early revolution efforts by the Democratic Party machine buses in texas bosses in texas trying to recruit mexican workers. Conservatism, although it is not expressed in this way, the book walls and mirrors, the political divides between mexican immigrants. It is about mexicanamericans views of immigration. He does not frame it as political history. The groups he is writing about our groups like the league of united latin american citizens. It is politics but none of these actors in about their political terms as members of the Republican Party or the Democratic Party. They are engaged in politics. I do not know that there has been an historian that has written about the political history. They have been engaged in all kinds of things. Among leadership, some are republicans, some are democrats. They are often taken by historians to be a kind of conservative democratic at least where it was in early requirement that all their members speak english, that they be american citizens, that they pledge allegiance to the flag. It is a good example of a group whose identity has been debated, well, there politics are conservative or they are moderate democrats. We dont know about the political leanings of their individual members. I look at all of the books out of historiesples of latino politics have been written but not of latino political history. For me, when it comes to republican hispanics, i do not know if i could point to a scholarly text until the one coming out in september written by ben. There are a lot of republican hispanics who have written memoirs that are really interesting, like linda chavez, who was in the reagan administration. She was nominated to be george w. Bushs labor secretary but had to withdraw her nomination when it was discovered that she had employed an undocumented immigrant. Memoirs, one in 1991. It is a good place to look for conservative latino positions on language issues, affirmative action. Wrote a second memoir after she had to withdraw her nomination called an unlikely conservative or how i became the most hated hispanic in america. Sosa who organized reagans Media Campaign for hispanics wrote a book called the americano dream. The chairman of the Cabinet Committee on opportunities for spanishspeaking people in the nixon administration, Henry Ramirez, a fascinating memoir of his time in the white house called a chicano in the white house. I spent some time how i am using the term hispanic. I thought it was fascinating that he chose to call his book a chicano in the white house. If you want to assign something about conservatism among hispanics, i would like i would look at some of those memoirs rather than a scholarly text. I have been influenced a lot by the coalition literature. , a handful of essays describing how multiracial politics worked in los angeles, the work on the poor peoples campaign. These works were influential to me because they introduce us to multiracial organizing. These unique communities were the ones who brought forth people who would become the leaders of latino politics in the United States. Gonzales of san antonio. The first mexicanamerican elected to the congress from convert from california in the 20th century, what is interesting is is that they are powered to positions of by multiracial coalitions. Viewed from a national level, they become the basis of a latino bloc. I suggest the importance of coalition as a concept employed by latinos in their dealings with each other in the making of latino politics during the 1970s and beyond. It is also in debt it is often it is also it is often assumed that it is a reflection of these groups. What was more natural, blacks and Puerto Ricans organizing together or Puerto Ricans from harlem. Isling with latino politics that moderates and liberals had a search for common issues they could work on, i lingual education, affirmative action. This is the approach the radical togetheranizer called but not scrambled. Latino coalitions were experimental and structure. Sometimes, they were 121. Mexican americans are a group. Puerto ricans are a group. We each get one vote. Sometimes it was a reflection of their population numbers. I think what are coalitions among each other, they are still working on alliances of africanamericans and poor whites. Rosina i echo you guys took a lot of mine. Another place to look is within labor history and to remember that immigrants are not coming without the political history of their own. They are active and becoming activists in their home countries and bringing the activism into the United States. There are numerous books that show this. I am blanking on his name right and all ofbiography the people that surround. Not only he not only is he talking about revolution in mexico, but he is also making very pointed critiques of what is happening in texas and what is happening to workers all across the United States. Other works show that individuals are coming and you see them holding up signs during the great depression. Though spanishspeaking immigrants new what they meant. They were pushing for those rights and to be included in those federal resources. Labor rights are civil rights. It is another example of this sweeping 100year history that shows political activism of immigrants and Mexican Americans in the labor sector and the ways that unions set their politicization as well. Another new book that is important, the city of inmates. Into the incarceration and the creation of a cursor allstate and what that means al state and what that means. Wonderful for my students and getting a sense of what it looked like and why individuals were being held near los angeles. Another book that is probably a little bit too long to assign to classes but a great place to get a sense of how long the history politica. 800page book that talks about how they created the parties and the ways in which they operated in different elections. Sometimes three chapters on the same elections. You can see the ways they are modeling the u. S. Government system. There is a reason new mexico is an outlier. Another one that is more in the legal field is manifesta. She writes in more historical way. Think about what it means to americans be citizens. You can see her influence in my second book project. You have native americans who were colonized by the Mexican Americans who were then colonized by the u. S. Jaime i think the book you were tioning about the return i want to go back to something ist jerry brought up which the contentious nature of naming protocols and selfidentity. What is the politics of names . Themselves . Nos call maybe they did not consider themselves latinos. Chicano in the white house, you mentioned. Do you have a sense of the evolution of self identification in politics and i think this brings up one of the biggest history, in political that concept of latino politics even make sense. Benjamin was talking about it. Balkanized set of communities. Very separate groups that are united conveniently in coalitions but maybe not as unified as we assume as historians or public memory. It is open. Rosina i want to go back to the 19th century. This is something that is not new. In the 19th century, you would see it within each of the communities that were in the southwest rate in the southwest. That is who they were. The wholepart of spanishspeaking americas. It did not mean hispanic americans in the United States. That is one of the things you see again and again in the document. Not only do you have to figure out how mexican you have to figure out how mexicans became Mexican Americans. There was a larger process that happened in the 19th century where they began to see themselves as united and that was a process that continued into the 20 century as well. Geraldo i do not know what the right word is. Maybe i will just say open minded view of names. Maybe i am thinking about this a little bit now because northwestern Latino Studies Program is thinking of changing its name. What is gained and what is lost . Something that undergrads pushing for that name change and i think that is part of my openmindedness. Call it whatever you want. Me if ild be mad at cast aside the importance of the decision so easily. As an historian, undergrads do not necessarily know this, or who have not studied it as much as we have, name changes happen all the time. I do not want to get hung up on any particular name. Some groups choose mexicanamerican Political Association or mexicanamerican Legal Defense and education fund. It depends on where they are located. That is where they are located. Know, introduce the term hispanic on the 1970 census. 1930erm on the census in was mexican. It was the first time it was a separate category of american, i guess. Was anspeaking important term. The 1960s, latin. There are so many names. They have some kind of meaning and the meaning can have political valences but i also dont know that any of these names is tied closely or exclusively with a particular partisan identity. Chicano is thought of as being an activist identity from the 1960s and 1970s. But then you have Henry Ramirez calling himself a chicano. I just gave you a whole bunch of nonsense. Play place a whole lot of emphasis on the different names. It is just always shifting. 1960s,arly part of the naming is one of the stumbling organizations from different parts of the southwest. It had reason why john kennedy in it. That was a very valuable thing. Who are we . A lot of the different regional did at least correspond to political orientations or socialization. Mexican americans adopted that name in california. That was too much for texan activists. Names are notes, really talking about real political differences and tactical differences and ideas about aggressiveness and how ethnic to be. Tohink the names also speak who is really trying to be the leader of this vast population so in the case of the mexicanamerican Political Association, the people who established it in california, had to explain too many Puerto Ricans who are politically active why their name was not going to be reflected in this organization. It was vital for them to overcome the stigmatization attached to the idea of mexican. Times,es, at different may be really important at establishing something but over time, it becomes a convergence. Bureaucratic names and political names start to align. Jerry mentioned spanishspeaking as a bureaucratic name and that was thought to be inclusive and avoided the pitfalls of nationality. It raised questions, if you do not speak spanish and you are Mexican Americans, are you still spanishspeaking . They could look at a list of names and say you belong to this group. Latinos a proxy for ethnicity. There are a whole set of competing terms operating until the middle 1970s and moves to be a standardization around hispanic latino. They tended to reject latino. 1964, Barry Goldwater had a supportive campaign. Latino was a conservative moniker at different points and byn became a liberal moniker the 1970s. Why i want toof challenge this naming issue poses to writing political latino political history. The first is that, there is a difference between explaining these name changes as an historian and inhabiting them as identity. Say, i am ads who with an x at the beginning instead of a ch. That is the position they inhabit. Students who call themselves latin x. Trying to explain it as an historian, there are all kinds of complications and that is why i do not hang too much meaning on any one the terms. I try to see them holistically. Maybe i am just confused about my own ethnic or political identity. Half white, half mexican, half latino. Beancle called me green when i was growing up. Maybe i am wrestling with these things on my own. I do not think these kinds of name considerations are unique to latinos or hispanics. Africanamerican, black, all kinds of self identification that black people have used over time. There is also anglo and white and caucasian. Those terms present their own challenges. I do think this question of naming and identity is often posed as one of the challenges to writing latino political history or the political history of hispanics in one of the questions i often get, is there such a thing as the latino vote . The hispanic vote . I do not know that there is a thing called the latino vote or the hispanic vote. There are millions of voters, whatever you want to call them, are millions of them do vote there are millions of them who do vote. There Political Behavior is worth explaining regardless of what you call them. It is often posed as a challenge to your project. There is no such thing as an hispanic vote and part of me wants to answer that by where did that get us . If that is where you want to end begin and end the conversation, that does not help us understand. Jaime i am looking at the clock. There is so much to talk about. I want to keep open the question about what challenges face the writing of political history and i also want to expand and ask a different question, which is, what do we stand to lose in mainstream political history by ignoring or not paying attention to Latino Actors and institutions . What is at stake here . Geraldo i feel like i have been talking a lot. Fundamentally, you run the risk of misunderstanding electoral outcomes if you ignore latino politics. Fourl point to a elections. The 1976 president ial election, 1996 president ial election, the 2000 president ial election, the 2012 president ial election the 1976 election, many analysts put a lot of weight on texas. Many carter won by not votes. It was in the 10,000s. Won if oneven out of 10 Mexican Americans had shifted their vote from carter to ford, ford would have one texas. Why did ford lose texas . Maybe it was because reagan was much more popular. Certainly, the Mexican American vote in texas is part of the story. How texas voted in 1976. Of1996, this was a couple years after proposition 187, clinton signed the illegal Immigration Reform and immigrant but the billy act, itself was largely seen as the product of a republican house, dole ended, robert up winning only 19 of the hispanic vote, which was the lowest any republican candidate since ford, and ford also had other things going on with watergate, the aftermath of that, etc. 2000, you could look at the gonzalez case, which was part of what was going on in florida. It was not the whole of what was going on in florida. There was also a famous airport case i cannot remember what ,t was called Elian Gonzalez we will stick with that. It is not the whole story, but it is part of the story. 2012, barack obama was seen to be reelected largely because of hispanic support in places like florida, new mexico, colorado. Say latinos are everything, and in order to understand american politics over the past 50 years you have to look centrally at latinos, but it is an important part of the story and i do not know why, political a historian, you do not want to include the part of the story that helps explain even electoral politics. I am sure there are lots of other reasons too. Latinos inincluding political history, we also think about the political time. To a degree, it supports the practice of paying attention to president ial administrations. Prospective latino politics, the president ial campaign is the central ritual, when there is a moment of party sponsors, latino organizations, and campaigns to summon a latino vote, to integrate a nationalized point of some direction of the countrys latino communities. It is the time to convince them to develop a conway in language common language of aspiration to playrfere on the community. Then it is deciding whether they will recognize Supreme Court appointments and have urgency and solving latino issues. At the same time, this is driven a lot by congressional activity. By bringing congress back in, it helps to read. Her eyes it helps to reperio dize a bit. And the more conservative, thatcultural period follows. The liberal architects of latino in thes came over depression and the shadow of the new deal. By the 1970s, they were politics, identity founding a congressional hispanic caucus, advocating for bilingual Education Programs and permanentfind the recognition of their people. They did that just to preserve and update the new deal as classbased policy and politics universalism. What many of them took as their task was to some of the was to synthesize the commitment to Economic Security with a new emphasis on cultural security. Not replacing one with the other. A closer look reveals that latino political leaders talked about language and culture and the uniqueness of latino family life as a means to an end, and and was often pursuing an expanded welfare state mark i things Like National Health Insurance and full employment policies. Rather than suggesting a sharp break with the new deal order, latino political history points to the persistence of traditional liberal policymaking in more ethnic forms. I agree with everything that has been said, and i want to start with more we had a great conversation on the last panel about reaching the public, what does that mean to reach the public or your students in a different way, because in many public, right . He what i noticed when i have been presenting about my book to different audiences, invariably somebody will come up at the end and say, i did not realize that there were people that were speaking spanish that were involved in politics in the 1840s. I did not realize that i had this longer history in this country that i could be a part of, because the rhetoric around the undocumented, around the border and immigration is all in here, that we are new here. It is one way to combat the view a perpetuals foreignness of Mexican Americans. I would argue it is the same for Asian Americans and definitely also for american indians, the fact that they are still here. I think that those are some of the latin america has been a central, key point of interest for the United States for over a century, with funding going there, influencing the politics in those regions, and that can also help to understand those individuals here now, and the source of politics that they the way they influence the United States itself. I think i would add that by simply talking about latinos as a side note or even a footnote, we make a lot of assumptions about large political blocs. The assumption is there is a block that is natural or preexistence. I think bens work and jerrys work and your article. Talk about your article. Sure. I am working on a thesis about the 1983 election in chicago. There is this one cool, beautiful narrative that dominates, which is black people registered in record numbers and it, andre than ever for it was this rainbow coalition, where mexicanamericans and Puerto Ricans also joined forces to support chicagos first black mayor. Morer dives show that often than not, division and tensions dominate the political conversation in a lot of ways. I think that is my personal take and cynical view of politics. Divewe do not do the deep into the process in which latinos are courted by politicians or parties, we lose the ways in which latinos are actually more complicated then divided that we assume. So that is what im working on, aowing how it was not coalition like we thought, and in general, we look at president ial elections today and 30 is a lot. Over 90 of africanamericans work together. There is a lot more there to unpack, and it is not a new development. In the history of fraud coalitions that are not just interethnic, but [inaudible] with that, we can keep talking and also open it up to questions from the audience. Back we have to in the two in the back. I have a question about latino politics and president ial politics, and how people think about what is typically american. I keep thinking about some of your own students, who lectured at history conferences, saying people dont think i view history because i have studied latinos since they left. I wonder if you could talk about realism and how its ways into this it sways into this conversation about [inaudible] a really interesting component of it that i want to learn more about. Well, i mean it is a long history in the midwest, right . The first book i can think of is the book on michigan, right . I think there is a recent book on wisconsin, with the earliest settlers coming in at the turn of the 20th century. There has been lots of activism in the farm. One of her chapters in the dissertation looks into that history. There are a lot of parallels going on with the southwest, and i think it is such an important place for the study to be, and also that those students who do come i had a student from peoplea, and she said, do not think we are in oklahoma two. She was fourth generation. I think that is another component of it. I think the hard part for the politics of that is that they are usually a smaller population. Having the political weight to have that political discussion, it usually will come around coalitions rather than the latino block, whether or not that exists, as we have talked about. I am trying to think of what i would add to that. That your last observation about numbers and stuff, i think it really does depend on where you look. In chicago, where there has been a longer tradition of people chuyluis gutierrez, garcia, 1. 3 million mexicans in the little village, that is kind populated puerto rican area, primarily, and it is incredibly diverse. Diversity means Different Things with the Coalition Politics we are talking about, but it is there. And the political influence i am also thinking of mark rodriguezs book about connections between crystal city, texas and migrant mexican farmworkers in wisconsin, and the political activism and labor organizing in wisconsin influencing labor politics oath in wisconsin and texas. There are examples. If this was a missed letters if this was a midwestern history conference maybe it is but i do think we would be having a version of the same conversation, latino historians have been for a long time arguing for the inclusion of midwestern or latino communities in the field of Latino History, which has historically been dominated by california, new york, or florida. I do not know how new that argument is, that i this point historians have been doing that for maybe 20 years. Dont know. If you wanted a bibliography, i am sure we could give you a long list. And the latino midwest reader. There are some others as well. In the back . For someone who writes about national heritage, your history and so on, what groups are appropriate to compare latinos with if you are writing about politics . We have a tendency to think of them as people of caller, and i was talking to a distinguished political scientist at stanford. All other ways of thinking. I asked, are they the new italianamericans . This distinguished political withtist at stanford italian ancestry, he said they absolutely are. Someone who teaches american are very those different comparisons. They are like africanamericans, they are like italianamericans. Italianamericans, they are a asup that is once thought of not quite white but is now thought of as very much white, which would lean in a different direction and help explain the focus of the people that jerry studies. My question, is that a fruitful comparison . Should latinos be compared with italianamericans more often than they are in the literature on this subject, especially reference to politics and voting behavior . I missed one word that you said, you brought up italian they absolutely are. They are the new italianamericans. Is that a fruitful way of thinking about latinos politically . Does anyone want to try to answer that . Where do you come out on it . One of the great things about latino studies and Latino History is that in defining the constituency, we can drop from a lot of other disciplines, such as sociology and Political Science. I think he should have given you a source for that statement. I make a comparison with africanamericans, because that follows the trend of actual Political Science that focuses on latinos. , itfricanamerican politics is the concept of linked faith see says, africanamericans if their chances as deeply integral and connected to the life chances of other people in their race, right . There is this political unity because what happens to my neighbor or my cousin can happen to me. More recent work by political ucla, he argues that links faith can also apply to latino politics, where increasingly people of the same pan ethnic label come to see an attack on one group or one community as an attack on us. Asis not as statistically strong, but he makes the argument that latinos as a collective, diverse, multiracial and pan ethnic group see themselves more connected with each other. That would be the Political Science answer that he should have said. [laughter] i am not sure if i agree with that. I have not read that, but i should. I will. My quick answer to you would be, i think you can compare latinos to any group you want to compare them to, but you would get i think the basis for comparing them would differ, depending on what groups you are comparing them to. And the time period. To take a couple of quick examples, when i think latinos are compared with italianamericans, it often is a conversation about assimilation and upward mobility of second or Third Generation will mexicans be the next italians in terms of assimilation or whatever . Usually, if the answer to that is yes, it is usually brought up as an argument against political scientist like samuel huntington, who say we segregate ourselves and never fully integrated. We stay among our own, etc. I think that if the italianamerican comparison. If you want to compare with africanamericans, you look at arturo chke oh, and afro descendent puerto rican who moved to new york in the late 19th, early 20th century and once he moved to new york, started to identify as an africanamerican, started the greatest collection of african American History and yeah. E you know, thewould also look at latino self identifications around issues of whiteness and cubans in florida in the late 19th century who distance themselves from africanamericans because florida is a jim crow state, you know . I think you can compare them to anyone, why not . I think the issues will change. You could compare them to anyone. Behere it is important to attentive to region and National Origin. In the thinking, at least with respect to the political position of latinos in the late and 1960s and early 1970s, it mattered where we were talking about. If you were talking about Mexican Americans in the southwest, a constituency for law and order republicans, mexicanamericans look and are appealed to and republicans want to convince themselves are like white ethics. Ethnics. T hardworking, insulated against welfare dependency, patriotic members of the silent majority. The same republicans view puerto ,icans as a racially ambiguous disenchanted, disillusioned, prowelfare dependent constituency. One that is at odds with the white ethnics of new york city whom they wish to court. So placed matters in this, National Origin very much matters, and definitely so with humans. The way i would think about it, how are people understood in relation to each other in the political system at particular times . You have not said a lot about gender. One of the reasons why he gave the answer that he did, he tends to think of latino voters as patriarchal. More so than the average american, whatever that means today. So the issue of male versus female roles and relations in the latino community. My question for you, is that an accurate perception . I have heard the opposite. Latino males basically vote how their wives vote. Asked tobecause i was speak to the latino state troopers of ohio. ,hese are Highway Patrol men almost all men, very few women, all latino. Voted for of them donald trump, and they were as patriarchal a group that you could imagine. If place alsonder matters. The west is more patriarchal in california or new york. To complicatent the story too much. There is regrettably not a panel on gender at this moment, by wants to go to both. I wish the two of you were up there talking about this together. Thank you, by the way, for doing this. Be discouraged that there are not more people. And not to give you buyers remorse, but this panel is going to be on cspan, so you could have watched this one later. [inaudible] you get the real live experience here, that is right. I have heard the opposite. One of my characters was the first hispanic to run for president as republican, says he learned fiscal conservatism at the knees of his mother. A mothers influence in the family is just as important. I have stories from the 1850s where the men who were marrying were americans, spoke english, and coming from the states and were marrying mexicanamerican women, and their children did not know they wereight . Learning spanish, that is why the spanish remained in the system for so long. Definitely, i think it depends on time and place, but again, the people who usually hear my story in terms of language, they are comparing with the germans, because it was so powerful politically. Your statements about the state troopers is really interesting. Another challenge, in addition to the pan ethnicity and individual groups versus the collective, one of the things i have often wondered and dont know the answer to empirically, how much latino voters resemble in as like other voters particular place, or in a particular field . What do other state troopers who are not latino vote like . Maybe 70 of them also voted for donald trump, or the county they lived in in ohio went for trump. It is an argument to bens point, about paying attention to this in a particular place. Yeah. I want to thank you guys. I am working on Asian American political history in the 1970 s. I would like asianer the comparison of americans. What i have learned to talking to some of the folks who worked in the government, one person in particular was telling me, whatever the latinos did, we followed a step behind them. I thought that was really interesting. Cabinet committee on spanishspeaking peoples, the asianamericans tried to create a cabinet, but it failed. Up aatino politics set model for them to follow. Either way, i am really excited about all of this, and i have an offshoot question. Researching history and looking at papers with members of congress who were asianamerican, what i found im wondering if you are finding similar things asianamericans, no matter where they lived. So these people live all over, these citizens, and they are writing these members of congress or people in positions of power in the federal government asking for help as in asia as an asianamerican. I am wondering if this is something you have seen in your research, all of this expectation based on certain people who look like them or are from their similar communities, and what they might offer to hispanics and latinos . Absolutely. The first thing that came to mind was the leftist congressman from spanish harlem, who is basically the congressman from puerto rico that everybody from the island would write to ask for help with whatever their problems were. I think the parallels in the period are clear. There is an effort for politicians to put people, latinos and asianamericans, to a less degree, invisible positions within cabinet agencies within the war on within the vastly expanded federal government. Those people are seen to be both of theresentatives larger group in american society, but also a conduit for assistance, and i think it is because there was still so much of an expectation at the beginning that the federal programs were geared around africanamericans, and that made it very important for people to believe that they had one of their own, so to speak, who could advocate for them in washington. Whether they could deliver very much is another story. The president certainly used s of thery ramirez world every u. S. President ultimately developed a latino point person, Interest Group will be was programs affect you . That was their job. You say you you also see that in local politics or state politics, where latino, National Latino politicians traveled the country to areas with latinos ort no local congressmen mayors or any latino figure of their race. A good example is the governor of new mexico, tony and i have, campaign for. Why . Chicago had no elected officials that were latino in 1982 or 1983. They do a lot of legwork, and i am sure the cases could be like theor someone first woman of caller in congress. She becomes a National Figurehead for a lot of asianamericans who want to see more representation. Another thing i would say is, i have a friend of mine who is coming to princeton as a postdoctorate in Political Science, and she works on asianamerican pan ethnic politics. The end of the 20th century, Latin Americans face a lot of the same challenges. A lot of the same countries and different languages that is a different problem for pan asian politics, but the issue of pan ethnicity and what holds it together is similar in both groups. Is somey quickly, there interesting connections between asianamerican latinos in the 70s, and im sure these are people you have heard of, like bill miyamoto is the head of nixons brown mafia, so he is in chicano representative many ways, and tells stories during his watergate testimony about growing up in the barrio of los angeles. He is an interesting figure. There are other interesting figures in california, and finally there is a graduate yen,nt at stanford, vivian who is working on asianamerican conservatism. Im sure she would love to know more about your work. That is a great comparison also. In the 19th century i feel like it is the opposite. Leads to the term alien. They were considered the first undocumented in many ways, an interestingis point as well. The other person i would Dennis Chavez is traveling to los angeles, arizona, and the only senator or representative for the entire group . [inaudible] the regional story become the National Story and then vice versa . Of these few trail but important figures that everyone looks to . M also doinghe things internationally . The 1940s,in 1950s, 1960s, so i am still looking at the 1970s, 1980s, but i am sure there is a lot there. I think with that we can close the panel, but i want to thank everyone whos the and thank you for your questions. Thanks for coming. [applause] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2019] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] now youre watching American History tv. Every weekend, beginning saturday at 8 00 p. M. Eastern, we bring you 48 hours of unique programming, exploring our nations past. American history tv is only on cspan3. In 1979, Small Networks rolled out a big idea. Let viewers make up their own minds. Ofpan opened the doors policy for all to see, bringing you unfiltered content from congress and beyond. A lot has changed, but today that big idea is more prevalent than ever. Cspanvision and online, is your unfiltered view of government so you can make up your own mind. , next