How
the West Was Won
By
Rodolfo Acuņa
The June 18th issue of Time Magazine carried an article on the LA Mayoral address titled "How the West Was Won, "which
portrays James Hahn's victory over Antonio Villaraigosa as some kind of macho victory. The article downplays Hahn's
racist ads and instead chooses to center on the divisions between Latinos and blacks.
Admittedly I was turned off by the title, "How the West Was Won," since it legitimizes a history of violence that saw the
genocide of the American Indian, the invasion of Mexico, and the atrocities of groups such as the Texas Rangers. It is a sort of bravado that has kept alive
racism toward Mexicans and other minorities. And anyway you cut it, racism is an ugly phenomenon.
That's why I was so torn when, on the day of the mayoral election, I read in the Los Angeles Times that an African American, Lamont
Hill, 27, had on May 26th been killed at a Tijuana nightclub in a racially motivated barroom brawl: Hill,
6-foot-8-inches tall had been barhopping in Tijuana with a friend and his older brother. They were accompanied by four young American women, three of whom were
Latinas and one who was African American. A Mexican in a baseball cap approached one of the women, a Latina, and asked her to dance. When the woman said
"no," he scolded her for dating black men and used a racial slur. She in turn told her companions.
Hours later, the two groups exchanged words. A Mexican male swung at Hill's friend, but hit Hill instead. A fight broke out and the
nightclub bouncers jumped on Lamont, beating him with flashlights. Allegedly Tijuana police also hit the victim. Hill died of asphyxia by strangulation. Five
Mexicans, all nightclub employees, were later charged with aggravated murder.
Meanwhile, Mexican authorities termed the incident unusual. According to them, fights break out nearly every weekend night in
Tijuana. Next, Mexican authorities made things worse by sending the Oakland man's decomposing body back home in a makeshift hearse without air-conditioning, in
a deteriorated state.
So what does this have to do with Los Angeles? We could write off the incident by repeating what Jake said in the film,
"Chinatown," and say "it's only Chinatown," in the Hill case referring to Tijuana. But, that's the problem: racism cannot be turned on and
off as the situation suits us. We have incidents such as the one in Tijuana right here in our backyard. Many Latinos and blacks get in fights, each justifying
their grievances by repeating racist constructs that have victimized the "other" throughout history.
The absurdity of this kind racism would be laughable if
not so tragic. I am currently researching a book on Chihuahuan history. Chihuahuenes like most nortenos have a mythical notion of race, with some thinking
themselves criollos or at least mestizos. In researching Mexican history, I have found that officially the mulatto population of
Chihuahua in 1810 was about 10 percent. That means that it
can be logically assumed that least a quarter of the population of the state had some African blood since censuses were generally based on whether a person
looked Indian, black, Spanish, or mestizo.
Looking further back into history, we learn that Spanish colonial officials constructed racial categories to maintain and dispense
privileges according to color. Of course, if you had money, you could always become white. Race limited the
mobility of the castas as the mixed bloods were referred to and the worse thing that you could be in Mexican colonial society was an Indian. Being a mestizo
took on prestige as the colonial period progressed because it meant that you were more Spanish than Indian. Accordingly, if you were an Afro-mestizo, it meant
you had more Spanish than black. By the end of the 300 hundred year ordeal, things were so messed up that the only thing that remained was the notion that si
tenias el parecido de espanol (if you had the appearance of being a Spaniard), you were prettier, more intelligent, and trustworthy than if you had the
appearance of an Indian.
This gave way to a ridiculous colonial mentality among Mexicans and other Latinos where we repeat the injustices of the past. Some
hate their color, and we mirror our insecurities in so many different ways. A child is born: "Que bonita pero prietita" ("How pretty but
dark"). Mothers telling their daughters not to go out into the sun because they'll get too dark. The tragedy is that this expression mirrors real life. Go
to Mexico City, and color reflects the economic status of the population. Even here in LA, we are prisoners to this past.
So now we come a full circle to how "Hahn Won the West." I religiously read Time among other magazines, and there is a
consistent disparate treatment of Latinos. In the article it goes out of its way to soft pedal the race issue (in as far as Hahn is concerned) and goes out of
its way to mention that Villaraigosa flunked the California Bar and that he had children out of wedlock. During and
after the presidential campaign I saw little reference to the fact that Vice-President Dick Cheney twice "flunked" out of Yale. Much was made of the
fact that Hahn's father gave him a legacy. However, that legacy went beyond politics. He could attend the best law school and work if he wanted to or not work
if he wished. Villaraigosa had to attend an evening, working class law school, something that is more prevalent among poor Latinos and other minorities than
among white politicians with a "legacy."
All of this makes the Lamont Hill case so tragic, so absurd.
We all contribute to this sickness called racism. Our Latino politicos should know better, and should not have contributed to a "How the West was
Won" mentality. This said, we should move on and we as a community should be outraged at what happened to Lamont Hill. We
should get off the trip of dwelling on the fact that the older African American political establishment, paranoid about their own falling status and power, and
look to making sure that we recognize racism within our own community. We have been victimized for too long by it.