Editor,
While I find the editorial debates surrounding Chicana/o Studies intriguing, at the same time I find them quite disturbing.
In the past week, both Chicana/o and non-Chicana/o students, alumni and community members have exerted pressures on the University to rework the internal and external faults of Chicana/o Studies and the University's responsibility to Chicana/o students. Unfortunately, the failure of the University community to contextualize the need of a Chicana/o Studies program for both Chicanas/os and non-Chicanas/os is one of the main issues that needs to be resolved.
While little media attention has noticed, there have been multiple non-Latinas/os involved in all aspects of planning and implementation of recent activities. As with most issues, the recent Chicana/o protests do not pit Chicanas/os versus Anglos or any student population versus another, instead the disputes surround the racist policies and poor funding of Chicana/o and Latina/o initiatives on campus.
From the beginning, el movimiento chicano has been a multi-ethnic coalition pushing for the equal treatment of Mexican-American peoples. The recent resurgence of the Chicana/o student movement here at UNM demonstrates this fact. Yet while many white folks have been involved in the pro-Chicana/o activities, those Anglo-Americans that feel their privileged position within society threatened quickly retreat to knee-jerk reactions to student protest.
While many Euro-Americans are quick to state that they are not racist, the fact remains that racism still affects people of color, especially at UNM. To begin with, we first must understand the difference between racism and bigotry. The concept of racism lies not within some closed world-view, but rather within the power structures that perpetuate the marginalization of non-white people.
Get content from The Daily Lobo delivered to your inbox
The fact remains that Chicana/o Studies (as well as African-American Studies and Native-American Studies) are marginalized within academia. The marginalizing of ethnic studies as a whole is rooted not, as Dorothy Baca argues, solely within economics, but instead is also rooted within a discourse of racist governmental and University policy.
The new generation of Chicana/o activists, many whom identify as xicana/o, are continuing the struggle begun years ago by their elders. One in every three students at UNM are Latina/o, yet the discipline of Chicana/o Studies is treated as a sub-academic area of study. The University has a responsibility to Chicanas/os and non-Chicanas/os to allow Chicana/o specific courses to be taught within the University setting. The fortification of Chicana/o Studies will lead to true "multiculturalism."
Although the University exploits the cultural production of Chicanas/os and other indigenous peoples by using their artwork to represent the "multicultural" campus environment, the poor funding demonstrates the disregard for any true "multicultural" dialogue. If we sincerely want "multicultural" representation at UNM, it begins not with the inclusion of "Indian" and "Hispanic" artwork on campus, but rather the teaching (and funding) of Chicana/o Studies, African American Studies and Native American Studies for all students. Without proper funding and academic legitimating, the Ethnic Studies programs will continue to be marginalized and their respective communities exploited without gaining any real educational success.
Now is the time that we, as a multi-ethnic student population, begin to understand the necessity of a Chicana/o Studies program for all students, regardless of ethnicity.
Dylan Miner
UNM student
