Interpreting The Chicano Movement

Mexican, Mexican American, Mestizo, Latino, Hispanic, you may think they all mean Chicana/o but they don’t. Many people interpret the term Chicana/o simply as another ethnicity or category. For others the term has evolved to carry a negative connotation; believing that being Chicano means being a rebel or even a “cholo.”
However Chicana/o is not an ethnicity. Anyone can be a Chicana or a Chicano; it is ultimately up to the individual. What Chicanos generally want is equality, a better life, and a world where many worlds can coexist. In order to better understand the identity and desires of a Chicano, one must comprehend the reason why the term was necessary. The term Chicana/o was first defined by scholars in the Manifesto El Plan De Santa
Hence, the Chicano Movement evolved resulting in a variety of definitions for the term Chicano. It is up to the individual to pursue the embodiment of being Chicano; there is no true definition or rules for it, as it is a concept whose purpose is to be molded to one’s perception. To me, being Chicana/o is a lifestyle with a specific notion that strives for equality and self-determination both as an individual and as a community. It is a “space” where you can reinvent yourself and act upon it to become the person who you envision, as Rosalinda Fregoso describes it in The Bronze Screen. In that space, actions define who you are, regardless of race, color, or gender. It is not a category; rather, it is an intangible phenomenon that you aspire to be and continuously work towards. In this, Chicana/o consciousness one is actively involved in a praxis. Praxis, as defined by Paulo Freire in the
A new identity and concept was necessary because they had been dehumanized. They were placed into a category by the dominant culture that only had negative connotations. Ruben Salazar states in his article, “Who Is A Chicano? And what Is It Chicanos Want?” that “Mexican Americans had to live with the stinging fact that the word Mexican is the synonym for inferior…” (pg 6). During the colonization of the America’s, Spanish priests burned the culture of the indigenous people both literally and figuratively. By taking their culture and forcing the natives to follow Christian traditions, the oppressors were slowly removing their history. As a result, they became what Paulo Freire in the Pedagogy of the Oppressed defines as ahistorical; they lived like animals, and as animals “they can give no meaning lacking a tomorrow and a today,” (pg 34) Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed. They had been conquered, hence, intermixed by so many people that their history had been lost, and no one was interested in reclaiming it. They had no homeland, no defined roots. Being ahistorical means having no agency in other words; you are an object. They had been completely dehumanized, for they were no longer seen as people but as objects, products that you can use as you please. They had no access to education or good paying jobs, therefore, were unable to progress. The