A prominent non-Black Puertoriqueña recently posted a video of herself on Instagram in which she says the n-word while rapping along to a song. On Twitter, many people commented on how this actress is quite racist and not apologetic about it. This example, among many in the ever evolving discussion around race, indigeneity, and Latinidad, prompted me to read more about the anthropology of mestizaje, that is the constructed identity of many people from the US and latin america who are not white yet not black nor indigenous.
In this book chapter, Safa, does a great job of both summarizing some existing conflicts in the theory of mestizaje while analyzing the ongoing efforts for autonomy in indigenous and 'afrodescendant' groups in latin america. When reflecting on the economic and social construction of identities in Brazil, Safa notes that "the co-optive strategy of mestizaje, [...] convinced mulattos they were more like whites than like their black brothers." This quote struck me as almost a rephrasing of the idea that fighting for the liberation of one group is fighting for liberation of all oppressed groups. In the US, racial and ethnic minorities (relative to the white, anglo majority), have all been systematically discriminated against. Unfortunately, many mestizx Latinxs have made great efforts to claim whiteness or gain the approval of white communities. One common reflection of these efforts are those who themselves immigrated to the US from latin america, yet now parrot right-wing xenophobic, and racialized rhetoric against latin american immigrants. These 'close the door behind them' immigrants view assimilation into american culture as also meaning denial of their own ethnic and racial identities. Just as in Brazil, mestizx proximity to power hampers their race and class consciousness toward oppressed groups, mestizx in the US begin to see Blacks and Indigenous as antagonists thus entrenching extant disparities.
Then for this racist actress who is not Black, these ideas manifest in statements asking "Where's our Black panther?" where 'our' refers to mestizxs. Rather than allying with the Black and indigenous communities fighting for liberation, many mestizxs view these communities as exclusionary. This surely is a direct result of mestizxs own awareness of their not-quite-white status yet this group lacks the same strong sense of community as the Black or indigenous communities in the US. In her chapter, Safa claims these two communities have different origins. The indigenous communities maintain strong ties thanks to their physical territories obtained as a result of negotiations with settler states. In comparison Black communities form out of the propagation shared culture; indigenous communities have culture yet Safa argues the territories are more critical for continuation of these cultures. Thus, for mestizx in america who live and experience vastly different class statuses, darkness of skin tone (the importance of colorist discrimination on identity cannot be understated) and communities (urban mestizxs vs rural mestizxs can be quite different), there is not the same nexus of identity or experience or proximity that begets the kind of communities Black and Indigenous people have.
Then, one function of colonial racial categorization is the pitting of each group against the other except for the white colonizers. If the white-supremacy inherent in mestizaje is ever going to be eliminated, it will start from decolonizing our desire to have what Black and Indigenous people have. At that point will we take stock of what we truly do have, what we have and have not experienced, and what the oppressor class takes from us. At that point will we know what we are fighting for alongside our Black and Indigenous brothers.