La Raza Speech at UCLA

I'm sure a lot of you have seen this video floating around. I know a lot of people never bothered to watch, and several probably turned it off before it was over. I'm going to post a transcript, then I have a few comments on it. Despite the violent nature of this speech, the sign in the background appears to read "Hate Speech is not Free Speech." The man speaking is Mr. Ronald Gochez, a history teacher at Santee High School in Los Angeles. You can visit their website at http://www.santeefalcons.org/, (213) 763-1000. The Los Angeles Unified School District can be reached at 213-241-7000 or superintendent@lausd.net. The LA Board of Education can be reached at 213-241-6389 or steve.zimmer@lausd.net.

"I want to start off by saying that the young man who spoke a little while ago is one of my students. And that made me so proud because I know that our people have strong leaders for years and years to come. As[el militante de la barrio?] a revolutionary Mexican organization here we understand what the [?] is saying . You're right. This is not just about Mexico. This is a global struggle against Imperialism and Capitalism. But we know that all of that is happening in the context that where we now stand is stolen, occupied Mexico. And the message that we bring, if you want to bring a little more of a revolutionary context to this, why is that these people- these frail, racist, white people want to keep us out of this country? It's not because, simply because of the color of our skin. It's not simply because they just want to exploit us. Let me tell you why. Because on this planet right now are six billion people. At the forefront of this revolutionary movement is La Raza. [??] We have a long history and example of our Commandante Fidel Castro Ruz. We got Hugo Chavez, Evo Morales, we got Brazil, Ecuador. You name it. We have nine, nine [??] governments in Latin America right now. And they know something that one young Argentine named Che Guevara said. It was called the Domino Theory. And he knew that every single country would go revolutionary one after the other, after the other, after the other.

So what do they fear? They know that every single country, they know that we will no longer fall to these lies called borders. We know that El Salvadoran, and a Guatemalan, and a Nicaraguan, se el Mexicano- that there's no damn difference. That we are all one people. So with that in mind, we see ourselves here- all of us here- as the northern front of a Latin American revolutionary movement.

There are more than 40 million of our people north of the Rio Grande. That means to them that's 40 million potential revolutionaries north of the border, inside the belly of the beast. So when you think about Why do they want to kick us of all people out, that's why. Because they know that we now know the truth. They know that now we are Raza, we're professionals, we're educators, we are revolutionary students. What does that mean? We are not just a regular culture anymore. We are a culture of revolutionary spirit. And that's the fear.

So with that being said, I want to leave you with this: as a Revolutionary and with revolutionary context, let's be clear about one thing. Our enemy is not the Minutemen. Quote me. Our enemy is not the Minutemen. Because the Minutemen are not the ones who have killed over four thousand six hundred people at those borders. Our enemy is the same enemy as Hugo Chavez- that Hugo Chavez has. Our enemy is the same enemy that keeps Africa poor. Our enemy is the same enemy that keeps Asia poor. Our enemy is Capitalism and Imperialism. OK, That's our enemy.

And I'll finish with this. I'll finish with this in respect of time. If we are serious about making change, if you are serious about making change, let me tell you- this struggle will go on for many more years after we leave UCLA. Reading a book, or writing a book, or teaching a class... that is not, that is not part of the movement. What you do 24 hours a day as a professional revolutionary- that is what's going to lead our people, and all people, to liberation. Viva La Raza."

So we'll start with the first bold statement- "Where we now stand is stolen, occupied Mexico" My initial statement is this: February 2, 1848, the Mexican government and the US government sat down and signed the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo to end the Mexican-American War. General Scott's troops had taken Mexico City, and the US hadn't lost a battle. The US was given the remainder of what is now California and New Mexico. The Mexicans agreed to acknowledge the Rio Grande as the southern border of Texas, and the US gave Mexico $15 million, as well as taking on any debts owed to citizens of the former Mexican territory. Spoils of war or legal 'business' transaction, Mexico gave up that land.
Second on that statement is this: If the US has no legal claim on the land because it was 'stolen' by the armies of the US, then neither does Mexico as they took it from Spain when they revolted. Before that, the Spanish conquistadors took it from the Aztecs.
Third, later on he mentions the 'lies that are borders.' If borders are lies, what matter does it make who 'owns' that land? It is not truly the US nor is it Mexico if you follow that logic.

Next is a line that I first bolded, then italicized because there are two separate, but similar points I want to make. First, by calling white people "frail, racist, white people" that is saying that white people are frail and racist- which is racism. (Racism- hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.... Usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.)
Second, "It's not simply because of the color of our skin." Hmmm... that sounds like the requirement to be racist. If "frail racist white people" aren't solely judging you on the color of your skin, they're not being racist. However, I have a word for him: bigot. Bigotry is the stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own. Sound like someone he knows?

"We will no longer fall to these lies called borders." Then why be in the US at all? Is it because on one side of this imaginary line, the standard of living is higher (like his leather jacket) the opportunities for education and promotion are higher (like his job as an educator) or because the civil liberties are better (like his right to gather PEACEFULLY and speak his mind)? Or does he just like the view better?

"There's no damn difference. We are all one people." Mexico is notorious for their harsh handling of the Guatemalan, Honduran, and El Salvadoran illegals crossing their own Southern border. Often the military is involved in border patrol, and three groups- criminals, local police, and immigration agents- all mistreat and abuse those that are caught. If all Latino/as and Chicano/as are one people, then why treat your brother so badly? If borders are lies, why patrol your own so harshly?

"north of the border" again with the border statements?

"Why do they want to kick us of all people out?" It's not just the Latino illegals. It's all illegals. Illegal means "forbidden by law or statute; contrary to or forbidden by official rules, regulations, etc." Guess what... if you are an illegal immigrant, if you crossed the border without authorization, a green card, a work visa, you are breaking the law. Not just any law, either, but the United States' most sacred law- the Constitution of the United States. Article I, Section 8 paragraph 4: "The Congress shall have Power... To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization..." We don't want to ship all those of Latino descent out of the country. We only want those who are here illegally to go back home and then, if they so desire, come back the right way.

Quick history lesson:
Fidel Castro- Communist leader of Cuba for over 45 years. Known for his long-winded anti-American speeches. Born into a wealthy family, graduated from Havana University as a lawyer. Led an ineffective revolution, was granted amnesty, and came back a second time, this time successfully.

Hugo Chavez- friend of Castro, leftist leader of Venezuela. Venezuela is constantly suffering from national strikes, threatening to severely disrupt the national economy. Venezuela is rich with oil, and supplies Cuba. Attempted to overthrow the government, and failed. He was elected to power in a landslide victory six years later, ousted, then after 2 days, his supporters took the streets, and he was placed back in the presidential palace.

Evo Morales- leader of Bolivia since 2006. Close relationships with Hugo Chavez and Raul Castro. As a coca farmer himself, he encourages growing coca (but not the production of cocaine), he is often at odds with the US's anti-drug policies. Another Socialist leader, he was not revolutionary, per se, but lost an election, building his fame from the defeat, and taking the next. He is Aymara Indian, and boasts that he is the first indigenous president of Bolivia.

Che Guevara- Argentine who studied medicine at the University of Buenos Aires, worked as a doctor. Joined Fidel Castro in Mexico while Castro was exiled between revolution attempts. Was instrumental in overthrowing Batista's rule in Cuba, inciting the Cuban public to revolt against their incumbent government. The CIA eventually caught him, and he was executed.

And now a quick vocabulary lesson:
Sedition- incitement of discontent or rebellion against a government. Any action, esp. in speech or writing, promoting such discontent or rebellion. syn. Insurrection, mutiny.

Treason- the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign. A violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or to one's state.
Article III, Section 3 of the Constitution- "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."

The speech was an act of sedition. If any of La Raza were to act on the speech, it would be treason. However, the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 expired and were not renewed, so this speech is protected under the First Amendment (assuming that as a public school teacher, Mr. Gochez is indeed a legal citizen of this great country. If he isn't, he doesn't have the rights of the Constitution.)

Either way, as an educator, and a history teacher no less, you would think he'd have a firmer grasp on the realities of borders and who California really belongs to. You'd think after studying so many failed communist/socialist countries, and how many of his idols failed in their politics, that he'd realize that maybe he's on the wrong side of the line. We cannot force him to cease these speeches, but we can learn from them.