Automomy

The Brown Berets on Nationalism

The question of nationalism and its relation to the Brown Berets is one that is often raised by many people who have not had experience or knowledge of our autonomous chapters. It is a question that brings along many misperceptions of our current methods, philosophies and goals. It is a question that must be scrutinized for both its positive and negative contributions to the historical aspects of our struggle. It is our expectation that by addressing the issue of nationalism we can dispel myths in order to create solidarity against injustice that extends beyond racial lines and national borders.

Nationalism is defined as a philosophy that promotes independence, unity and self-determination on the basis of race, land and national identity. It’s an ideology which roots lie in the Western concepts of private property defining itself with distinct borders. In the United States one can argue that the first acts of nationalism became manifest when the American colonies defied the British Monarchy and later gained their independence. However, the American Revolution was not a struggle between race or class, but was a power struggle between the elite segments of both societies.

In the United States, nationalism in the struggle between race and class took place during the slavery of Africans who were used to create capital and the economic foundation of this country. Africans were extracted from their ancestral land and were stripped of all cultural identity. They were forced to submit and adapt to the language, religion and customs of the slave master. Yet through slavery, many Africans continued to resist. One resister who managed to educate himself and gain freedom was Marcus Garvey. Garvey attempted to uplift the consciousness of the entire black population by promoting black pride and called for a return of blacks to Africa.

During the Civil Rights era (1950-60), the Nation of Islam and Malcolm X continued to promote nationalist ideology arguing that blacks were genetically superior to a “white race of dogs.” They reminded blacks that they were descendents of mighty African civilizations and that Africa was the matrix of all humanity. Malcolm called for a separation of blacks from whites. He demanded that the United States give up parts of its territory in order that blacks and former slaves can create their own nation on this continent.

After breaking with the Nation of Islam, Malcolm, through education and experience (his trip to Mecca), abandoned black nationalism for a more humanitarian and international perspective of gaining social justice. However, Malcolm’s early rhetoric was one that captured the attention of the most despised and disenfranchised segments of the black community, namely youth. Malcolm inspired many to embrace and have pride in their race and culture.

In line with Malcolm X, The Black Panther Party utilized black nationalism to attract membership and bring attention to poverty and police harassment taking place in their communities. Membership was strictly reserved for blacks and was organized through hierarchy. As the party matured, leaders such as Huey P. Newton began to advocate internationalist socialist perspectives that were opposed by members who believed that nationalism was the only solution.

During the 1960′s, many Chicanas and Chicanos were also inspired by nationalism. Chicanas and Chicanos shared the same cultural genocide as their black brothers and sisters. Forced to assimilate to both Spanish and English European colonizers, they were now the brunt of racism taking place throughout the Southwest. Chicanismo, a term resurrected by activist students, vehemently rejected white hegemony and assimilation and submission to the dominant culture. Chicanismo urged us to reconnect to our indigenous roots and spiritual connection to the land. Chicano/a nationalism advocated the expropriation of U.S. territory stolen from Mexico and denounced this country for many broken treaties made with native peoples.

Comparable to the black community, nationalism captured the attention and imagination of many alienated and desperate Chicanos and Chicanas, yet failed to go beyond the confines of mere rhetoric. Both black and Chicano/a nationalists failed to analyze the historic mechanisms of capitalism and its relation to racism and private property. Nationalists failed to find similarities and create solidarity with other oppressed people outside their race. Many nationalists adopted the same jargon and racial discrimination utilized by the dominant culture, alienating many committed activists who could have advanced their struggles. Nationalists became secluded and blindly trusted that the color of skin was enough to convert people to their cause, later discovering that many informants and traitors were largely members of their own race. Historically, nationalism has been an easy answer for individuals seeking an immediate remedy against injustice and society’s ills. It has been a philosophy readily embraced by individuals who neglect, refuse or are mentally incapable of intellectual and inclusive approaches in eliminating the yokes of capitalism, imperialism and patriarchy.

The autonomous chapters of the Brown Berets reject any form of nationalist ideology and believe that revolution is only attainable when oppressed communities understand their differences but solidify their forces in order to eradicate their common oppressor. We recognize that the battle for social justice extends beyond any racial or national confines. We recognize that Mexico is dominated by the capitalist bourgeoisie who cater to U.S. interest, so to expropriate Aztlan for Mexico is not only reactionary but a ludicrous ideology. Like our ancestors, we recognize that the land has no borders and belongs to all of earth’s creatures. Private property with its lines of demarcation is the bedrock of capitalism that has kept the masses subjugated and alienated from each other. We will continue to stand in solidarity with those who rebel against injustice.
c/s

HORIZONTALISM

Horizontality is an attempt to decentralize power by allowing everyone to become active and direct participants in the decisions and actions that affect the individual most. This is accomplished without top-down directives or obligations to the individual. Autonomy is constructed through mutual agreements and voluntary commitments that respect the diversity of individual capabilities and personal desires.

“Horizontalidad” is a word that encapsulates most directly the ideas upon which the new social relationships in the autonomous social movements in Argentina are founded. It is a word that previously did not have political meaning. Its new meaning emerged from a practice, from a new way of interacting that has become a hallmark of the autonomous movements. Horizontalidad is a social relationship that implies, as it sounds, a flat plane upon which to communicate. Horizontalidad requires the use of direct democracy and implies non-hierarchy and anti-authoritarian creation rather than reaction. It is a break with vertical ways of organizing and relating, but a break that is also an opening. When explaining how an asamblea or unemployed workers movement functions, in the months and even years after the rebellion it was common to have people set the palms of their hands to face down and then to move them back and forth to indicate a flat plane, as well, in order to indicate how it does not function, joining the tips of their fingers together to form a kind of triangle or pyramid. Horizontalidad in many ways is these hand gestures with the knowledge that they genuinely represent a new and powerful set of social relations.

Horizontalidad is a living word, reflecting an experience that is ever changing. Months after the popular rebellion in Argentina, many began to speak of their relationships as horizontal, as a way of describing the use of direct democracy and consensus in striving for dignity and freedom. Now, almost 9 years after the rebellion, those continuing to build a new and revolutionary movement speak of horizontalidad as both a goal and a tool. It is a goal in the sense that there is a clearer understanding now that all of our relationships are still deeply affected by capitalism, and thus by the sorts of power dynamics it promotes in all of our collectives and creative spaces, in how we relate to one another in term of gender and race, information and experience, and so on. Horizontalism is a tool, on the other hand, in the sense that a danger is now more clearly recognized that language may become the politics and relationship, rather than a reflection of a living process. This is an active conversation.

(Horizontalism referenced from Wikipedia)