To return to the Kemper Faculty Home Page, click here.

To return to the ANTH 3311 Home Page, click here.

To return to the ANTH 3311 Syllabus and Schedule Page, click here.

Mexicans in the United States

Robert V. Kemper

Alternative Names.  Chicanos, Hispanics, Hispanic-Americans, Hispanos, Latinos, Mexican Americans, Mexicanos.

Location.  Persons of Mexican origin – coming from all of its thirty-one states and Federal District – can be found in all fifty U. S. states, plus the District of Columbia and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. In regional terms, 55% of Mexican-origin persons live in the West, 34% in the South, 9% in the Midwest, and 2% in the Northeast. The states with the highest numbers of Mexican persons are California (8,455,926; equivalent to 25% of the state’s population), Texas (5,071,963; 24.3%), Illinois (1,144,390; 9.2%), and Arizona (1,065,578; 20.7%). The states with the fewest Mexican-origin persons are: Vermont (1,174; 0.2%), Maine (2,756; 0.2%), North Dakota (4,295;0.6%), and West Virginia (4,347; 0.2%). Although many Americans associate the Mexican-origin population with agricultural labor, this stereotypical view is untrue. In fact, according to the U. S. Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey (March 2002), 46% of Mexican-origin persons reside in central cities and another 44% live in metropolitan areas, but outside the central cities. Only 10% of Mexicans living in the United States are located in non-metropolitan areas.

History.  Unlike many other diasporic populations in the United States, Mexicans often reside in places that once were part of their homeland. For several centuries, under the flags of Spain, Mexico, Texas, California, and eventually the United States of America, Mexicans have found themselves labeled as subjects, citizens, or foreigners (legal and illegal) of diverse political regimes. Their changing status often was not a result of their own migrations, but a consequence of on-going geopolitical transformations in North America. In such circumstances, many Mexican-origin persons have been “foreigners in their native land” (cf. Weber, 1973). There is considerable irony in the changes that Mexicans have encountered during recent centuries in their relationship to their land and to their labor upon it. Natives and foreigners, legal and illegal, needed and unwanted – all of these circumstances have characterized Mexicans in what is now the United States.

Even before the nation of Mexico gained its independence from Spain (1810-1821), Hispanic persons in what then was called Nueva España (“New Spain”) were dispersed in small numbers throughout what today is known as the American Southwest and West (Weber, 1992). By 1540, long before Europeans began to establish colonies along the Atlantic coast of North America, Francisco Vásquez de Coronado traveled north from Mexico City in pursuit of the fabled cities of gold in the Southwest. In 1598, Juan de Oñate began the colonization of New Mexico, where the town of Santa Fe was founded in 1610. The Pueblo Indian revolt of the 1680s drove out the Spaniards, but they eventually returned to reestablish their control over the region. In 1761, the province of Alta California was founded and in 1769 the Franciscan mission at San Diego was established as the base for the subsequent colonization of coastal California. In 1776, San Francisco was founded, followed in 1781 by Los Angeles.

Texas declared its independence from Mexico in 1836, and then was annexed into the United States in 1845. In 1846, California broke away from Mexico, and the United States soon after declared war and invaded Mexico. The conflict ended with the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (1848). The Gadsden Purchase (1853), designed to provide American railroad interests with passage through Arizona’s Mesilla Valley, demonstrated that the prior struggles with Mexico were part of the wider project of U. S. expansion in North America during the nineteenth century.

The passage of the Fourteenth Amendment (1868) to the U. S. Constitution assured that all persons of Mexican and Hispanic origin born in the boundaries of the United States at the time of the Amendment would be granted U. S. citizenship. Unfortunately, a generation later, in 1902, the Reclamation Act had the effect of dispossessing many Mexican-origin persons in the United States of their lands, including those which had been protected under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo.

The Mexican Revolution of 1910-1921 resulted in many thousands of Mexicans, rich and poor, fleeing the violence in their homeland by crossing the border into the United States. At the same time, the rise of isolationism and xenophobia in the United States resulted in the passage of the Immigration Act in 1917, the establishing of national origin immigration quotas in 1921, and creation of the Border Patrol in 1925. In 1929, the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) was founded in Texas to deal with the resulting cases of discrimination, school segregation, and civil rights issues.

A pioneering scholarly project to investigate Mexican migrants in the United States was carried out in 1926 and 1927 by the well-known Mexican anthropologist Manuel Gamio. With a grant from the Social Science Research Council, Gamio and his research team carried out fieldwork on the general characteristics of Mexican migration to the United States (1930) as well as on the stories of individual migrants (1931, 2002). Gamio’s works appeared in English at a critical time for U.S.-Mexico relations.

Beginning in 1929, the worldwide Depression brought about devastating job losses everywhere, and the approximately one million Mexicans in the United States were no immune. As a result, more than half a million Mexicans returned (or were repatriated) to Mexico during the decade of the 1930s, with significant consequences for communities in rural Mexico, especially in the important migrant-sending states of Jalisco, Guanajuato, and Michoacán (cf. Taylor, 1933, 1981).

When World War II brought an end to the decade-long Depression, many Mexicans in the United States enlisted in the war effort, even though Mexico was a non-combatant nation. In 1942, a special bilateral treaty (initially called the Mexican Farm Labor Supply Program, but better known by its unofficial title, the “Bracero Program”) was signed between the United States and Mexico to permit Mexican laborers to work contractually in the U. S. In 1943, Public Law 45 further codified the earlier bilateral treaty, and then was extended in 1951 as Public Law 78. The significance of the Bracero Program was not lost on ethnographers working in that period in rural Mexico. Ralph Beals, then conducting research in the highland Tarascan community of Cherán, concluded, “Cherán is probably more influenced by Gary (Indiana, U.S.A.), Mexico City, and Morelia (possibly in diminishing order) than it is by [nearby] Uruapan and Pátzcuaro” (1946:211). The influence of the United States on Cherán continued in subsequent decades, as migration to the north became part of the local way of life (Castille 1974).

The Bracero Program did not create a utopia for Mexicans working and living in the Untied States. Even during the period of World War II, difficulties between the Mexican and the Anglo population resulted in the “Zoot Suit” riots in southern California. In response to such issues, the American G. I. Forum was created by Mexican-American veterans in 1947. Anti-immigrant actions against Mexican and other ethnic populations continued when, in 1952, the U. S. Congress passed the Immigration and Nationality Act and “Operation Wetback” deported more than 1,000,000 Mexicans (some of whom actually were U. S. citizens). The tensions continued into the 1960s. For example, in 1963, there was an uprising among Mexican-Americans in Crystal City, Texas, and in the same year Reyes López Tijerina organized the Alianza Federal de los Pueblos Libres (“Federal Alliance of Free Peoples”) in New Mexico. Two years later, César Chávez led the United Farmworkers in strikes and boycotts against the powerful California agricultural establishment. Also in 1965, Luís Valdez founded El Teatro Campesino in Delano, CA, to highlight the struggles of Mexican Americans in the agricultural sector.

The Bracero Program ended officially in 1964. The next year, an alternative to Mexican migrant labor was created in the Border Industrialization Program (known more commonly as the maquiladora program). This program attracted hundreds of thousands of Mexicans from central and southern Mexico to the border area where hundreds of assembly plants were established in the free-trade zone on the Mexican side of the border. The success of the program did not stop migration flows across the border. On the contrary, the maquiladoras provided a way-station for the multi-generational flow of persons to the United States.

During the 1970s, Mexico began to suffer severe economic problems, mainly due to overly optimistic estimates for government spending in the face of substantial oil discoveries in the Gulf of Mexico. By 1982, the unexpected decline in oil prices made it necessary to devalue the Mexican peso by more than 70 percent. This action greatly increased the value of remittances from Mexicans living and working in the United States, and shifted many potential rural-urban residents away from Mexican cities and toward the United States. Public confidence in the Mexican system was made worse by the Mexico City earthquake of 1985. Continuing economic and political problems in Mexico resulted in a further monetary devaluation in 1995 and required a $53 billion international loan-guarantee arrangement to provide further support for the peso.

Despite the implementation on January 1, 1994 of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), financial problems continued to cause turmoil in Mexico, resulting in higher flows of immigration to the United States as well as the first-ever defeat of the long-dominant PRI political party in the presidential elections of 2000. When the two new Presidents (George W. Bush and Vicente Fox) met in Mexico for their first face-to-face conversations in February 2001, the central issue on the agenda was finding a mutually acceptable solution to the problem of “illegal” immigration (and its associated human rights concerns). Recognizing the importance of the migration issue in U.S.-Mexico relations, The Washington Post newspaper featured a front-page story about Tzintzuntzan, Michoacán, and its migrants in Tacoma, Washington (Jordan, 2001). Unfortunately, progress toward this goal was stalled by the events of September 11, 2001, and subsequent U. S. preoccupations with border security measures.

Demography.  According to the 2000 U. S. Census, some 20,640,711 persons identified themselves as “Mexican.” This represented 58.5% of all Hispanic or Latino persons in the United States. By March 2002, the number of persons of Mexican origin had increased to approximately 25 million. The Mexican population in the United States has more males (52%) than females (48%), a situation that reverses the gender pattern in both nations. This preponderance of males in the Mexican-origin population generally is attributed to the great number of single men who travel north to the United States as temporary laborers.

With regard to age, Mexican-origin persons in the United States are spread throughout the life span. The age distributions for both females and males is considerably younger than those for other comparable groups in the U.S.  The combined distribution for males/females is as follows:

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, March 2002, Table 1.2, Ethnic and Hispanic Statistics Branch, Population Division, Internet Release date: June 18, 2003.

Language.  Spanish is the predominant language spoken by migrants arriving from Mexico and by first-generation Mexican-origin persons in the United States, although many persons strive to learn enough English for work and school. Since the court cases of the 1970s, bilingual education programs have become widespread in public schools, as have English as a Second Language (ESL) programs targeted at adults wanting to master basic English language skills. Considerable controversy surrounds bilingual education programs aimed at Hispanic populations in the U.S., even to the point that some politicians are seeking support for a federal law that would codify English as the nation’s “official” language. In the meantime, Spanish continues to be important either as the first or second language for many Mexican-origin persons throughout the U. S. (González, 2001).

The continuing use of the Spanish language also provides a cultural and political statement for Mexicans in the United States (Guerra, 1998). Music, television, and movies are available in Spanish through a wide variety of media. Even economically disadvantaged Mexicans in the U. S. subscribe to cable or satellite systems in order to have access to Spanish language programming. The rapid growth of the Hispanic market also has caused publishers to respond by bringing out new magazines and journals in Spanish. In September 2003, Barnes and Noble – one of the largest bookstore chains in the nation – announced plans to expand significantly the Spanish-language fiction and non-fiction sections of its superstores.

In addition to Spanish, between 5% to 10% of persons coming from Mexico to the United States also speak one or more indigenous Amerindian languages. Although no systematic data are available on the numbers of “ethnic” Mexicans who have migrated to or settled in the United States, ethnographic studies and journalistic reports reveal that representatives of many of the 50+ Indian languages can be found north of the border. For example, ethnographers have described multilingual Maya-speaking groups in Houston (Hagan, 1994) and Dallas (Adler, 2004); Mixtec- and Zapotec-speaking populations in California (Kearney, 2000), and Tarascan-speaking migrants in California (Dinerman, 1982) and Illinois (Anderson, 1999). McConahay (2001) reports that thousands of male teenagers from the Maya regions of Mexico and Guatemala are now migrating into California and Florida in pursuit of agricultural labor opportunities.

CULTURE AND COMMUNITY

Economic Activities.  The Mexican-origin population in the United States has a diverse role in the economy. Of the 10.5 million persons employed as of March 2002, the Current Population Survey reports that the largest occupational groups are “operators, fabricators, and laborers” (22.7%), “technical, sales, and administrative support” (21.9%), and “service occupations” (21.3%). The next occupational groups are “precision production, craft, and repair” (16.2%) and “managerial and professional” (11.9%). The smallest occupational group is “farming, forestry, and fishing” (6.0%). Compared with the general work force in the United States and with other Hispanic populations in the U.S., Mexicans are significantly overrepresented in the “farming, forestry, and fishing” category, and also are involved disproportionately in the “precision production, craft, and repair” and in the “operators, fabricators, and laborers” categories.

A commitment to entrepreneurship and risk-taking is characteristic of the economic strategies found among Mexicans in the United States. For example, a hard-working person might begin with a low-paying job delivering pizzas, then become the owner of the pizza restaurant in a few years. This story is not unique to Mexican-origin persons in the U. S.; in fact, it is the goal for many immigrants. This goal of economic independence and control has resulted in the opening of thousands of Mexican restaurants, tire repair shops, beauty shops, bridal boutiques, and similar family-level enterprises throughout the United States. In the process, brand-names familiar in Mexico are now found in many metropolitan areas with large Hispanic populations. For instance, Paletería La Michoacana (“Popsicles Michoacán”) has expanded its well-known product line from central Mexico into Texas, California, Illinois, and elsewhere.

Despite their considerable entrepreneurial success, Mexicans in the United States continue to suffer from higher unemployment rates (8.4% in March 2002) than that for the population as a whole (6.2% in March 2002). The earnings of Mexicans in the United States run below national averages for the population at large, with females being even more disadvantaged than males. For example, whereas 11.5% of individual workers in the U. S. population report annual earnings above $75,000, only 3.8% of Mexican males and only 2.1% of Mexican females earned this much, according to the Current Population Survey conducted in March 2002. The comparisons are not as imbalanced when seen at the level of family and household units, presumably because Mexicans in the U. S. often have more working adults (working at more jobs) in their families and households than is the case for the population in general. Nonetheless, only 13.6% of Mexican families in the U. S. earned more than $75,000/year versus 30.8% for American households in general. At the household level, the corresponding figures are 13.3% for Mexicans versus 24.7% for the population at large.

On the other side of the economic equation, Mexican-origin families endure poverty more than twice as often (20.4%) as the population in general (9.2%). This imbalance is even worse for married couple families (15.9% vs. 4.9%), although the difference shrinks considerably for male householders with no spouse present (16.7% vs. 13.1%). The worst case is found among female householders with no spouse present: for Mexican-origin women, 38.4% are below the poverty level; the comparable figure for the general population of female households with no spouse present is 26.4%. In effect, single females with children – whether Mexican or otherwise – suffer higher levels of poverty than do single fathers with children or married couples with children.

Gender Roles and Status.  Traditional gender roles in Mexico were characterized by the saying, “El hombre en la plaza, la mujer en la casa” (“Men out in the world, women in the home”). Migration to the United States brought many challenges to traditional expectations about men’s and women’s roles within and beyond the household (cf. Hondagneu-Sotelo, 1994). An important change in gender relations is tied to the disproportionate numbers of men in the Mexican-origin population in the U. S. During and since the Bracero Program, men often have traveled alone to the north and have had to learn to do chores that women would have done back home in Mexico. Often, four or more young Mexican men – some single and others married with wives and children back home in Mexico – reside together in a two-bedroom apartment, where they take turns with shopping, cleaning, laundry, and other duties for which they were not prepared in their youth. On the other hand, Mexican women in the U. S. often work outside of the home, in addition to their responsibilities for childcare and housework. When numerous Mexican families reside in close proximity, whether in central cities or in the suburbs, women may create informal cooperatives to deal with all of their children. Thus, one or two women can remain at home caring for all of the children, while the other women go to work along with the men.

When men and women are separated, with one in their home community in Mexico and the other in a destination community in the U.S., their roles also suffer transformations. Back in Mexico, the women have the full responsibility for maintaining the home, caring for the children, and struggling economically while awaiting the remittances sent from their spouse in the north. Because of the high levels of stress associated with long periods of separation, many couples endeavor to be together in the U.S., even if it means leaving one or more children with relatives in their home community. Ideally, the children will be brought north one or more at a time until the entire family is reunited. This reunification naturally is more difficult when one or more of the family members is undocumented. The decision to remain in the United States – legally or illegally – appears to differ between men and women. A recent study of Yucatecans in Dallas, Texas, found that “women were more likely than men to consider permanent return to Mexico and that men more commonly intended to stay in the United States in the long term” (Adler, 2004:93).

Housing and Use of Space.  Home ownership long has been an important goal for most Americans. Currently, about 68% of all U. S. citizens reside in “owner-occupied” housing and only 32% are renting. Among the Mexican population in the United States, the proportions are divided evenly among owners and renters. In the population at large, three-fourths of “family households” live in owner-occupied units while only 53% of “nonfamily households” are owners. For the Mexican-origin population, the comparable figures are 54% for family households who are owners and 32% for nonfamily households. While part of these differences in home ownership can be explained on economic grounds – i.e., the Mexican population is less affluent than the American population in general – the migration experience also plays a special role. Most migrants from Mexico leave their own family homes to go north. Thus, to become a home owner in the United States represents a cultural as well as economic transition that many cannot bring themselves to make. To become a home owner in the United States creates a permanent relationship with the property and, thus, reduces the likelihood that the owner will return to the community of origin in Mexico. Furthermore, undocumented migrants have problems obtaining the necessary papers to be able to qualify for loans to buy a house. In some cases, Mexican-origin families have participated in sweat-equity housing programs such as Habitat for Humanity in order to become homeowners.

Property and Inheritance.  With respect to property and inheritance, Mexican persons are obliged to follow U. S. laws for property located in the United States. Because few Mexican citizens are in the practice of making wills, either in Mexico or during their time in the north, their legal rights can become complicated. Moreover, many Mexicans in the United States still have claims to family homes and property in their communities of origin in Mexico. Extended residence in the north does not automatically reduce or eliminate their desire to retain rights of inheritance. Usually, inheritance involves dividing property and goods among siblings, although sometimes the youngest child (or whichever child took major responsibility for caring for the parents until their deaths) may inherit more than a single share. This emerging practice of ultimogeniture represents a cultural adaptation in opposition to the older Spanish preference for primogeniture. One way in which some families manifest their intention to claim inheritance rights in Mexico is to return to their communities of origin during their vacations and holidays (Kemper, 2002). In addition, some families return home to Mexico to participate in religious rituals (e.g., baptisms, confirmations, weddings, funerals) with an eye toward sustaining their children’s property rights, not only for the familial holdings but also for their participation in communal properties (e.g., shared agricultural lands, known as ejidos).

Marriage, Family, and Households.  Marriages are not arranged in the strict sense, but Mexicans in the United States do have a strong sense of what is an appropriate match for their sons and daughters. Moreover, marriage is seen as bringing together two extended families, not just as creating a married couple. Marriage beyond one’s community of origin (or religion) is increasingly common, especially as length of residence in the U. S. increases. Because more than 90% of Mexicans are Roman Catholic, the religious sacrament associated with marriage is seen as more important than civil marriage license. This cultural perspective on the legal standing of marriages runs counter to standard American practices, in which the civil marriage license is the document of legal standing.

The separation of spouses that frequently takes place when husbands travel northward to work in the U. S. increases the possibility of permanent separation, divorce, and even multiple marriages. For these reasons, many priests and pastors believe that migration increases social disorganization among Mexicans in the United States as well as in their communities of origin in Mexico.

Household size among Mexicans in the United States tends to be larger than among the American population at large. In many American neighborhoods, both in the inner cities and in the older suburban areas, it is not uncommon to see multiple related families sharing space where a non-Hispanic couple with no other family present might feel crowded.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, March 2002, Table 5.2, Ethnic and Hispanic Statistics Branch, Population Division, Internet Release date: June 18, 2003.

Socialization and Education.  The median level of education among Mexican migrants to the United States is considerably lower than those of the Anglo population in the U.S., but are higher than the median level in the migrants’ communities of origin in Mexico. This creates a paradox: as emigrants, the Mexicans heading northward are, on average, the better educated and more highly skilled among their peers; as immigrants, the Mexicans find themselves below the curve in their arrival communities. Their challenge is to find employment for which they are qualified under standards more stringent than what existed in the places left behind. For this reason, Mexican-origin persons in the U. S. are eager to obtain more education for themselves and especially for their children and grandchildren (cf. Trueba, 1999).

Getting a good education long has been a concern of Mexican American parents. One of the earliest legal cases dealing with desegregation involved Mexican-origin parents and their children in the small town of Lemon Grove, located about ten miles east of San Diego, California. On January 5, 1931, Jerome T. Green, principal of the Lemon Grove Grammar School, barred 75 children of Mexican descent from entering his school. Outraged that their children were being segregated from the Anglo children, and forced to attend classes in a converted barn, the Mexican American community of this San Diego suburb sued the Lemon Grove School Board and won a resounding victory that was upheld in the California State Supreme Court (Espinosa, 1986).

Despite the victory in Lemon Grove, the history of Mexican participation in U. S. schools has continued to be difficult. In some cases, children of Mexican immigrants were forced to abandon Spanish in favor of English. Schools dictated that only English could be spoken on school grounds, and punished students who were caught speaking Spanish. Many Mexican parents were concerned that having a Spanish accent would be a handicap for their children in American society, so they endeavored to strip their children of this linguistic and cultural heritage. However, in 1967, in the spirit of civil rights legislation common to the era, the U. S. Congress passed laws to provide special educational programs for children of limited English proficiency. Then, in 1974, Congress approved the Equal Educational Opportunity Act. The result has been the burgeoning of a large bilingual education movement, especially in the American southwest, even though this movement has met well-funded political resistance from conservative Anglos in many areas. In face of such challenges, and court cases that sustained the bilingual education project, some well-established Hispanic Americans are going back to school to learn the Spanish that they were denied in their childhood.

According to the Current Population Survey (March 2002), the educational attainment levels of the Mexican population in the United States fall well below that of the American population at large. For Mexican-origin persons, 32.1% have less than 9th grade educations, whereas the comparable figure is only 6.9% for the overall population. For persons with 9th-12th grade (but with no diploma), the figures are 17.3% for Mexican-origin persons and 9.0% for the overall population. At the other extreme, 9.0% of all Americans have advanced, post-bachelors degrees, but only 1.9% of Mexicans in the U. S. have such advanced degrees. Despite these historical facts and the high drop-out rates among Mexican American high school students, even newly arrived immigrants from Mexico still have high hopes that their children will graduate from high school, go to college, and have professional careers.

Community Organization and Structure.  Although some communities, especially in the Southwest or along the south Texas border, are dominated numerically by Mexican American populations, most Mexicans in the United States usually find themselves living as a minority among Anglos, Blacks, Asians, and other populations. To the extent that the Mexican population is clustered together, they may have more organizations in their communities. For example, the Casa Guanajuato in Dallas was established by migrants from the state of Guanajuato in Mexico to deal with the needs and opportunities facing the large numbers of residents in Dallas. Established in 1994, the Dallas Casa Guanajuato is one of some 25 such establishments in American communities. They receive assistance from the government and people of the state of Guanajuato and, in turn, provide assistance to their home communities. Among the migrants in Dallas, the Casa Guanajuato offers cultural programs, sports leagues, educational and training workshops, and celebrates Mexican political and religious holidays.

In local communities, the parish church is an important focus of Mexican participation in American life. The increase in immigration in recent decades has increased the demands for church services – not only for community masses and personal confessions, but also for baptisms, confirmations, marriages, funerals, and other sacraments. The Roman Catholic Church, especially through Catholic Charities, often is a leading agency in helping undocumented migrants and refugees in dealing with the complexities of making their cases before the appropriate federal bureaucracies.

At the neighborhood level, Mexicans often participate in tandas (rotating credit associations), operated largely by women for the economic benefit of their families, individually and collectively. Tandas are particularly important when families are unable to obtain credit through normal financial institutions. These alternative credit schemes are not unique to Mexicans in the U. S. but also are widespread in central Mexico and the northern border regions (Vélez-Ibáñez, 1983).

At the community level, gangs also are important elements of social structure and organization. They represent alternative associations for many young men and women cut off from other forms of social support (Vigil, 1998, 2002). The violence and graffiti associated with gangs are offset by their powerful role in focusing and sometimes defusing violence in their communities. Gangs are especially prevalent in the poorest neighborhoods, but few areas escape their grasp, especially in terms of their involvement in drug-related activities.

Beyond specific neighborhoods, Mexican American Chambers of Commerce operate throughout the cities of Texas, California, and similar states to serve the needs of Mexican American business owners and entrepreneurs. Similar professional organizations exist for doctors, lawyers, academics, etc. Many of these associations now use Internet sites to communicate with their members locally, regionally, nationally, and even internationally.

Social Stratification.  Although most Mexicans in the United States are to be found in the working class, there is an increasing number of middle-class professionals, including educators, medical personnel, lawyers, business owners, etc.

Generation membership is a significant form of social stratification. Newly arrived immigrants from Mexico often work and live in places where previous generations of Mexican-origin families used to live, but now have moved on to better neighborhoods. Older, long-term Mexican-Americans may feel a greater sense of involvement in U. S. affairs than do the younger, recently arrived persons.

Political Associations and Activities.  Since the politically tumultuous 1970s, The American G. I. Forum, LULAC, and La Raza Unida Party have been joined by the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF), and dozens of other public non-profit associations and political organizations intended to improve the situation of Mexican persons in the United States. In addition, faith-based organizations such as the Industrial Areas Foundation (IAF), DART, PICO, and the Gamaliel Foundation work closely with Mexican communities in the U. S. to accomplish political purposes with respect to community development.

Religious Beliefs and Practices.  The Roman Catholic church is the mainstay of the great plurality of Mexican persons in the United States. As the number of Mexicans has continued to increase, the Catholic church has been unable to provide an adequate number of Spanish-speaking priests nor has it constructed enough new parish churches to meet the demand for worship services. At the same time, the role of Protestant, Mormon, and Pentecostal denominations is on the rise among the Mexican population in the U. S. Traditional “folk Catholicism” continues to be important among most Mexicans in the U. S. Thus, practices such as the Noche de Muertos (“Day of the Dead”) have moved northward from Mexico in the company of the migrants. Local festivals in Mexico sometimes are celebrated among the migrant communities and enclaves established in the United States. For example, several hundred persons from the small town of Tzintzuntzan, Michoacán, have settled in and around Tacoma, Washington. In recent years, they have replicated the major annual fiesta from their home town, honoring El Señor del Rescate, to whom many migrants have made promises in petitioning for good health, good work, and good family life. Such fiestas-at-a-distance provide a sense of the extended community to migrants and their children unable to travel back to the community of origin (Cahn, 2003).

Another important dimension of religious and social practices involves the compadrazgo (“ritual co-parenthood”). The most important compadrazgo ties are those established between the parents and the sponsors of the child at the time of the child’s baptism. Other important fictive kin relationships may be established at the time of confirmation, at quinceañera parties, and even at special occasions. In addition to the compadrazgo, in some areas hermandades (“brotherhoods”) exist for special religious purposes. For example, in Northern New Mexico, brotherhoods of penitentes are to be found practicing their self-flagellations during Holy Week.

Devotion to the Virgin Mary, especially through the symbol of the Virgin de Guadalupe, is widespread. Even many Protestant Mexican Americans are eager to celebrate and honor the Virgin de Guadalupe.

Ceremonies and Holidays.  In the United States, Mexicans enthusiastically celebrate the 5 de Mayo (commemorating the victory over the French army at the Battle of Puebla in 1862) and the 16 de Septiembre (honoring the El Grito [“Shout”] for independence from Spain of the priest Miguel Hidalgo in 1810). In addition to these two transnational holidays, faithful Catholic Mexicans celebrate their devotion to the Virgin de Guadalupe on 12 December. Other important holidays include Christmas (25 December), Epiphany (6 January), Holy Week in the springtime, and Mother’s Day in May. The Noche de Muertos (“Day of the Dead”) takes on a significance for many Mexicans – both in Mexico and in the United States – that far exceeds its importance in rural and urban Mexico. Instead of celebrating Columbus Day, Mexicans at home and abroad prefer to call that day Día de la Raza – the Day of the People.

Arts.  Mexican popular culture is manifested in the United States in two principal ways: the importation of Mexican productions and traditions, and the distinctive innovations of Mexicans in the U. S. For example, Mexican styles of music (mariachi, sones, norteña) are available in the U. S. through live shows, recordings, TV programs, movies and the like. But so is the distinctive música tejana and the Chicano rap music of southern California. These days, in major metropolitan areas, there are nearly as many Spanish language stations on the AM and FM bands as there are English language stations. Although Mexican and Mexican American actors and actresses are still few in number, numerous movies with Mexican themes have been critically acclaimed and/or successful at the box office.

The increase in artistic production among Mexican Americans in the United States has resulted in the creation of Cultural Centers in many metropolitan areas. In Chicago, the Mexican- Fine Arts Center is located in the Pilsen/Little Village neighborhood, where European immigrants lived a century ago. The Center celebrates major Mexican religious and political holidays with contemporary art displays and offers Mexican and locally-produced artistic items in its “Tzintzuntzan” gift store. In Dallas, a new Latino Cultural Center (designed by a famous Mexican architect) was inaugurated on 16 de Septiembre 2003.

Recreation and Leisure.  Sports – especially futbol (“soccer”) and beisbol (“baseball”) are especially popular among Mexicans in the United States. Many Mexicans participate in these and other club-level and family-level sports in their own communities. Driving through a Mexican neighborhood in Los Angeles, San Jose, or San Antonio reveals families and neighbors playing soccer, volleyball, while young men hang out at the nearby billiards hall or in the boxing arena.

Professional athletes like Fernando Valenzuela (Mexican-born baseball pitcher for the L.A. Dodgers and other teams in the 1980s and 1990s) and Oscar de la Hoya (Mexican American boxer), are celebrated on both sides of the borders. Among other sports, the Dallas Cowboys in American football and the Dallas Mavericks in basketball have made inroads among the Mexican American and Mexican populations by featuring Mexican players.

Also popular for several generations is the driving and displaying of automobiles modified as “lowriders.” Some lowrider cars have been passed down from generation to generation, from the 1940s to the present. Lowrider clubs also cross generations, with grandfathers, fathers, and sons being involved in maintaining the cars and in sustaining the lowrider culture. Recently, scholars have come to appreciate lowriders as distinctively Mexican American works of art along with murals and graffiti (Tatum, 2001).

Cultural Variation.  The diversity of the Mexican-origin population in the United States extends through many cultural domains, although it is especially evident in the domain of health. The perceptions, attitudes, and practices of many Mexicans in the United States still are based on ancient humoral concepts (e.g., hot-cold). Conditions such as pregnancy, hypertension, diabetes, acid indigestion, susto, mal de ojo, and bilis are considered “hot,” whereas menstrual cramps, pneumonia, colic, empacho, and frío de la matriz are thought to be “cold” (Torre and Estrada, 2001). By balancing humors, and using natural products (e.g., herbal teas) rather than prescription chemical products, Mexicans and Mexican Americans try to emphasize wellness and holistic approaches to health. Since many Mexicans are not covered by employer-based health insurance, they often must seek health care where they can afford it, whether with the local curandera (“curer”), at a neighborhood clinic, at a discount pharmacy, or through a church-based parish nursing program. Mexican American women still use midwives for pregnancy care and deliveries, or go to a teaching hospital that accepts indigent/charity cases for free or on a sliding scale.

The capacity and competence of the U. S. health care system to deal with the diversity of health beliefs and practices of Mexican Americans has been called into question by academics, by doctors and nurses, and by leaders of Mexican communities in the U. S. Certain diseases (e.g., diabetes) are much more common among Mexicans in the U. S. than they are among the general population. Moreover, alcohol, cigarettes, and other substances are widely used in the Mexican American population. Culturally appropriate solutions to these problems are still being sought.

Relationships to Host Country, Homeland, and other Diasporic Communities.  Mexicans in the United States come from thousands of different communities in rural and urban Mexico, more often heading northward in groups composed of young single men and women, but sometimes accompanied by complete family groups (cf. Massey et al., 1987). Once settled in U. S. communities, they are likely to be living in enclaves where they already know several of the residents. The pioneers who have preceded the new arrivals offer wisdom about operating in the new location, even helping with places to live and places to work. Once settled, new arrivals begin to work to support themselves and to earn enough to send remittances back home to Mexico. Eventually, the migrants will take time (and the risks involved in crossing and re-crossing the border) to return to their homes in Mexico for recreation and re-creation. They will see their families and friends, participate in fiestas and fulfill any mandas (“promises”) made to local saints or Virgins. They return to participate in baptisms, confirmations, marriages, and to deal with other matters.

Identity.  Despite class and educational differences among the Mexican-origin population, their common origin as “Mexican” provides some measure of social solidarity. This sense of “pan-Mexican” identity usually emerges at times of religious rituals (e.g., the 12th of December, the day of the Virgen de Guadalupe) and political celebrations (5 de Mayo and 16 de Septiembre) more than in day-to-day activities. Otherwise, Mexicans in the U. S. tend to identify themselves with their home towns and home states when they are operating within the Mexican community in the United States. At the same time, migrants north of the border expand and extend their sense of identity in order to associate themselves with others from nearby communities of origin. For instance, when they are at home in the municipio of Tzintzuntzan, Michoacán, persons from small hamlets (e.g., Ojo de Agua, Ichupio, Tarerio) distinguish themselves from the residents of the larger town of Tzintzuntzan proper. On the other hand, when people from these different communities find themselves living together in and around Tacoma, Washington, they all identify themselves as being from Tzintzuntzan, which not only is the head town of the municipio but also is the location of the parish church that serves all of these localities (Kemper, 2002).

This sense of “extended community” is typical of Mexican experiences during the contemporary era of transnationalism. The broad processes of globalization are influencing Mexicans at home as well as those in the United States. The daily struggles of stay-at-homes and migrants are not the same, but all of their struggles take place in contexts that are mutually in tension (Vélez-Ibáñez and Sampaio, 2002).

By the second or third generations, Mexicans in the U. S. tend to lose the close connections with the communities in Mexico where their parents or grandparents once lived. Their sense of identity shifts to their own places of origin and current residence in the United States, much in the same way that other Americans separate their heritage from their current circumstances.

References

Adler, Rachel H. (2004). Yucatecans in Dallas, Texas: Breaching the Border, Bridging the Distance. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.

Anderson, Warren D. (1999). Familias Tarascas en el Sur de Illinois: La Reafirmación de la Identidad Étnica. In Gail Mummert (editor), Fronteras Fragmentadas (pp. 145-166). Zamora: El Colegio de Michoacán/CIDEM.

Beals, Ralph L. (1946). Cherán: A Sierra Tarascan Village. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution, Institute of Social Anthropology, Publication No. 2.

Cahn, Peter (2003) All Religions are Good in Tzintzuntzan: Evangelicals in Catholic Mexico. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Castille, George Pierre (1974). Cherán: La Adaptación de una Comunidad Tradicional de Michoacán. Serie de Antropología Social No. 26. México, D.F.: Instituto Nacional Indigenista y Secretaría de Educación Pública.

Dinerman, Ina R. (1982). Migrants and Stay-at-Homes: A Comparative Study of Rural Migration from Michoacán, Mexico. Monograph No. 5. La Jolla: University of California Center for U.S.-Mexican Studies.

 Espinosa, Paul (1986). The Lemon Grove Incident. San Diego: KPBS. (video, 60 minutes).

Gamio, Manuel (1930). Mexican Immigration to the United States: A Study of Human Migration and Adjustment. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

 Gamio, Manuel (1931). The Life Story of the Mexican Immigrant. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

 Gamio, Manuel (2002). El Inmigrante Mexicano: La Historia de su Vida, Entrevistas Completas, 1926-1927. [Devra Weber, Roberto Melville, and Juan Vicente Palerm (compilers)]. México, D.F.: Miguel Ángel Porrua.

González, Norma (2001). I Am My Language: Discourses of Women and Children in the Borderlands. Tuscon: University of Arizona Press.

 Guerra, Juan C. (1998). Close to Home: Oral and Literate Practices in a Transnational Mexicano Community. New York: Teachers College Press.

 Hagan, Jacqueline Maria (1994). Deciding to Be Legal: A Maya Community in Houston. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

 Hondagneu-Sotelo, Pierrette (1994). Gendered Transitions: Mexican Experiences of Immigration. Berkeley: University of California Press.

 Jordan, Mary (2001). Immigration on Mexican Agenda: Bush and Fox to discuss Change in Treatment of Illegal Workers. The Washington Post (Friday, February 16), p. A-1, A-22.

 Kearney, Michael (2000). Transnational Oaxacan Indigenous Identity: The Case of Mixtecs and Zapotecs. Identities 7:173-195.

 Kemper, Robert V. (2002). Migration and Adaptation: Tzintzuntzeños in Mexico City and Beyond” In George Gmelch and Walter P. Zenner (editors), Urban Life: Readings in Urban Anthropology (pp. 193-204). Fourth Edition. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.

 Massey, Douglas, Rafael Alarcón, Jorge Durand, and Humberto González (1987). Return to Aztlán: The Social Process of International Migration from Western Mexico. Berkeley: University of California Press.

 McConahay, Mary Jo (2001). The New Face of Farm Labor - Indian Teens from Mexico, Guatemala. La Prensa San Diego (August 31, 2001).

Tatum, Charles M. (2001). Chicano Popular Culture. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.

Taylor, Paul S. (1933). A Spanish-American Peasant Community, Arandas in Jalisco, Mexico. Berkeley: University of California Press.

 Taylor, Paul S. (1981). Labor on the Land: Collected Writings, 1930-1979. New York: Arno Press.

 Torre, Adela de la and Antonio Estrada (2001). Mexican Americans and Health. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.

 Trueba, Enrique (Henry) T. (1999). Latinos Unidos: from Cultural Diversity to the Politics of Solidarity. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

 Vélez-Ibáñez, Carlos G. (1983). Bonds of Mutual Trust: The Cultural Systems of Mexican/Chicano Rotating Credit Associations. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Vélez-Ibáñez, Carlos G. and Anna Sampaio (editors) (2002). Transnational Latina/o Communities: Politics, Processes, and Cultures. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

 Vigil, James Diego (1988). Barrio Gangs: Street Life and Identity in Southern California. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Vigil, James Diego (2002). A Rainbow of Gangs: Street Culture in the Mega-City. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Weber, David J. (editor) (1973). Foreigners in Their Native Land: Historical Roots of the Mexican Americans. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.

 Weber, David J. (1992). The Spanish Frontier in North America. New Haven: Yale University Press.