Hyphen is not real enemy in the ‘Mexican-American’ debate
The same State Board of Education member who called critical thinking instruction “gobbledygook” years ago now is warning against another insidious foe: The hyphen. Yes, that little slip of a punctuation mark can seem so innocent. In the eyes of David Bradley and some other farright activists, however, the unifier of two words is really a divider of us all. Its corrosiveness is especially threatening when it’s nestled between the words “Mexican” and “American.” At least, that was the Beaumont Republican’s chief objection to the title of a proposed social studies course, being considered by the state board, called “Mexican-American Studies,” or MAS.
“I find hyphenated Americanism to be divisive,” Bradley said, seeming to echo an online post by a far-right education activist penned days earlier.
“Hyphenated-American courses further divide students and faculty,” Donna Garner wrote. “And America is already seeing what these ethnic studies courses are doing to create hatred, bitterness and strife among our college and university students. We Texans do not want that same type of racial/ divisive hatred, bitterness and strife to run rampant in our K-12 public schools.”
Actually, racism and hatred come from ignorance and fear – not education. The “strife” on college campuses seems to be caused not by the thoughtful study of the full spectrum of people, ideas and events that contribute to the American story, but by those who want to write it out of the history books. And studies have shown that MAS courses in public schools actually improve academic performance, not hurt it.
Nevertheless, Bradley, realizing the inevitability of the course itself becoming a reality in a state with a burgeoning
Latino population, did the only thing he could to blunt the impact. He offered up an alternative title, which was accepted when the board approved the course Friday: “Ethnic Studies, An Overview of Americans of Mexican Descent.”
That’s the title, at least for now. Board members agreed to accept public feedback. And it’s already starting.
Activists and scholars, who are glad they succeeded in getting the board to issue standards for the course after four years of trying, say the new title has sparked a fresh battle to restore the original one.
“Everybody clearly saw it as an insulting move,” said Trinidad Gonzales, a scholar and history instructor at South Texas College. “I don’t think they realize what they’ve done. You’re probably going to see a similar outcry as we saw with the racist textbook.”
He was referring, of course, to the infamous 2016 textbook submission that referred to Mexicans as lazy and was peppered with other errors. The poor-quality textbook was the only submission that year because the board previously had refused to issue specific standards for textbook writers to follow.
Now, the board has reversed course, and the first reading of the standards is expected this summer.
Bradley’s war on the hyphen just underscores the insensitivity some board members have shown in countless discussions about the need to diversify history standards to include contributions and achievements of those who still remain relative footnotes in Texas textbooks.
Source of pride
The hyphen, while it can be a source of pride in linking two cultures, also can be an important reminder that some in this country still are viewed as “other.”
“Any reasonable person would like for us to live in a country where we could just be called American, without distinction,” said Jose Maria Herrera, historian and clinical assistant professor of social studies methods at the University of Texas at El Paso. “But the distinctions exist because the group that has traditionally had power still maintains those distinctions.”
One reason the term Mexican-American is important, Herrera said, is because it represents a history, identity and experience vastly different from Latinos or Hispanics whose ancestors hail from other countries. That includes a history of violent oppression in parts of Texas.
“If you were on the U.S. Mexico border in the early 20th century, then your chance of getting lynched was almost as high as your chance if you were black in Mississippi,” Herrera said.
He notes that even though he is middle class, dresses in a preppy style, and his family has been in the United States for generations, well-meaning people tell him he speaks English well. Hateful people have told him to go back to his country. Concerned store clerks follow him around to watch for shoplifting. And all this, he knows, is nothing compared to the biases black and brown people face in housing, lending and the criminal justice system.
‘No hyphen in the trenches’
“An uncle told me there’s no hyphen in the trenches,” Herrera said. “Of course, there isn’t. Because you suddenly realize the absolute absurdity of hating your fellow man for something he has no control over.”
Still, as strongly as the hyphen disconnects, it joins together.
“When people say you should be teaching American history, I say ‘Well, I am. American history is me.’”
Of course, Bradley’s opposition really isn’t to the hyphen.
It’s about the inclusiveness that the hyphen represents: a link, a bond, an equal footing between a unique heritage and the common values shared by Americans. These do not have to conflict. They do not erode each other.
“It seems to be only divisive to the people who don’t want to be inclusive,” said Gonzales, the scholar at South Texas College.
He points out the origin of the term “Mexican-American.” Hyphen or no hyphen, the term emerged after World War I, when veterans of Mexican heritage used it to push back on the notion that they couldn’t be loyal Americans.
“They picked the wrong label to bash,” Gonzales said. “This is a label of patriotism.”
Yes, the veterans were of Mexican heritage, and they also were proud Americans. It is not disloyal to be both in our diverse nation. In fact, it’s kind of the point.