Recently, I posted this article make sure you read it or this one won't make sense:

To summarize, it was an article comparing the Bracero program to the modern ICE deportations based on undocumented people being a part of the Industrial Reserve Army of Labor. While it was overwhelmingly well received I did get criticism that I think is worth addressing. The first commenter taking issue said this:

The Industrial Reserve Army of Labor

To diverge from the path of response for a second, let’s define and expand on the main concept expounded in the article. The industrial reserve army of labor. This is the class of workers who are especially prone to unemployment or otherwise being bullied and strong-armed by the Capitalist class which keeps wages down for everyone. If everyone had a stable job, we would all demand higher pay. By creating a class that is easily exploitable you create an entire group always possible to swindle out of wages, that is also easily moveable out of the workforce. This allows for Super-Exploitation, a concept that stems from Marxist Dependency Theory. This is when labor is paid for below the level of remuneration. The bare essentials necessary for existence are not covered by the employer. By having an easily exportable group in America, this allows for Super-Exploitation within US borders. This makes it accessible to all kinds of business owners, not just big firms capable of expanding to the global south. Lastly, to piggyback off the thought of anthropologist Nicholas De Genova, deportability is a major factor in maintaining this industrial reserve army.

It is precisely in the ‘illegal’ migrant’s deportability that we may encounter anew the centrality and constitutive role of labor...The exquisitely refined legal vulnerability of illegalized migrant labor – above all, materialized in its deportability – plainly serves to radically enhance the preconditions for its routinized subordination within the inherently despotic regime of the workplace.

Deportation by Nicholas De Genova

This is not a unique idea to me. This is simply analyzing the industrial reserve army as Marx describes it in relation to the material conditions of the US.

Comment 1:

The only problem is that this isn’t “excess” labor since these people are so concentrated in specific sectors. Undocumented people make up the majority of the labor force in agriculture and a substantial portion of the service and construction industries. There are also many who work in food processing (factory labor).

There really is no material reason for any of this. They’re just racist. They just believe that America should be a white nation. This is an attempt to turn the clock back to the time of their fantasies when in reality it only accelerates American decline since these people are actually integral to the real economy and the majority of young people don’t meet their definition of white anyway. This is all part and parcel of the national suicide that is driving all of these decisions from tariffs to foreign policy.

I grew up in a rural conservative part of California where people have been obsessed with illegal immigration for as long as I can remember. This is just red meat for that base.

Materialism Not Idealism

Where I disagree is in a few ways. I’m not an idealist, history is moved by material conditions NOT ideology. The bourgeoisie are not reacting to sustain ideology for ideology’s sake; instead what they’re doing is protecting themselves materially and furthering their goals that way. The bourgeoisie is not interested in the ideology of their most fervently racist supporters. Instead they are worried about pillaging American’s money through tax cuts, subsidies, upward redistribution, crypto rug pull scams, etc. Ideology is instead to give the base a reason to trust them. Think of how rapidly the right wing has gone from paying constant lip service to libertarianism, even going as far as to follow the pro-gay line briefly shortly after gay marriage was legalized, to now doubling down on the Christian aspect of the conservative ideology. the elite do not care about ideology.

Instead the conservative voter cares about ideology because it has been pushed on them from the top down as a tool to divide the working class. This is why it is so fluid, because they are simply capitalizing on pre-existing sentiment to build false consciousness. Think of how much more antisemitic the right wing is now compared to before Trump was elected. Essentially, the inequality caused by Capitalism could no longer be ignored causing the bourgeoisie to shift the blame to a subset of the rich (Jewish people due to their proximity to wealth and tendency towards progressivism) instead of to all the rich. The elite are not confused. They are driving the car. Just because they are driving it off a cliff doesn’t mean they don’t know how the steering wheel works. They are crashing it on purpose to collect the insurance money.

Immigrants As Excess Labor

To address the second major part of the comment, the commenter disagrees that undocumented people are a form of excess labor that can be bled off. This is because they make up a majority of agricultural workers, manufacturing workers, and a large part of the service industry. However, this essentially proves my point. The labor is excess labor in the eyes of the bourgeoisie, not in reality. As we enter a recession the rich cannot afford to employ everyone profitably, hence lay offs happen. However, if you leave a massive body of people without work you tend towards civil unrest. So the undocumented people are removed from the workforce which opens up jobs in the service industry, manufacturing, and agriculture. As mentioned in my original article, agriculture is not a job that native citizens are willing to take. The fact that the rich hope to open that industry does not mean it will be filled. Yet, the Republican party goes all in on promoting the idea of bringing manufacturing back to the US, hence removing a large portion of people that work in that industry makes perfect sense. Manufacturing is a massively propagandized industry by the GOP. Lastly, the reality is that many work in service jobs which are the positions most likely to be filled by American citizens. Materially this makes the most sense to a failing economy. Think especially of how ICE tends towards emptying job sites instead of the criminals they said they would focus on. They could go empty out Sureño and Norteño barrios and would likely not face the resistance that people tend to assume they would. Rico cases happen all the time, in which an entire set is arrested, often at the same time and location and are not met with a shootout or violent opposition. Instead they focus exclusively on job sites, hence why it has a material basis, it is about freeing up jobs for an economy that cannot afford to employ everyone.

Racism as a Tendency

Lastly, the commenter mentions that anti-immigrant and especially anti-Mexican sentiment is common in border states. However, to keep things brief, I’ll ask you, what was the most common sentiment around anti-Mexican talking points before cartel violence and rapists rhetoric?

Comment 2 & 3

Following that, I was met with another comment from a different user.

Ya but isn’t that all just going to drive up the price of labor? I don’t see what material motive a capitalist could have for increasing labor costs.

I think that the material component of this is a mass market media whose purpose has always been to pit native workers against immigrants as a way to divide the working class. The current crop of conservative elites have had their brain Swiss cheesed by ideology and are actively slitting their own throats as a result of the contradiction.

My Response

I am quite, fond of my response and think it address his major points so I will repost how I originally responded.

You’re pointing to a key contradiction. What you’re presenting is true of a boom economy or expansion. In a healthy market sure deporting workers reduces supply and raises labor cost but we’re effectively in a state of crisis right now. During periods of recession you can’t profitably employ everyone so they’re getting rid of excess labor (excess not in so far as not productive but instead not profitable to keep employed). Keeping a large body of people who aren’t employed is dangerous for the rich because that leads to conflict as unrest. They cannot and will not deport every single immigrant it’s simply not possible so this creates a circumstance where those who work without documentation during and after must keep their heads down and accept their sub-minimum wage to avoid conflict (deportation is a common threat against undocumented workers from their employer) lastly to address the Swiss cheese brain it’s a huge mistake to assume our enemies are stupid they play dumb if they were dumb they wouldn’t be in power. But their voting base is easily manipulated which is why racism is a useful tool for them to antagonize people other than the rich. Lastly to touch more directly on my point about opening up jobs to an extent I do believe they think they’ll fill those jobs with white people but they simply cannot as I stated. It’s more so bleeding off labor they can’t employ for now and then bringing it back in when the market is expanding again. At least historically that’s how that works, but we’ll see if this time is different and it very well might be.

His Rebuttal

I was too flippant with the Swiss cheese comment. I don’t think they’re drooling from their mouth dumb, but I don’t think this would be the first time in history where the ruling class thought things were one way only to discover they were wrong.

We’re all the product of our context and so much of what the elite do is consume ideology. I just am not sure they could diagnose and plan ahead for a crisis caused by surplus labor, particularly the right wing of the elite.

The Elite Are Not Stupid

He then claims both that the elite are not dumb, but also that they’re too dumb to run the economy that they already do run. In terms of their ability to plan ahead for a crisis, we are essentially already there. This is not an advanced plan ahead situation, it’s instead a response to the market, hence why corporations rely on lay offs at times to stabilize profits after being in the red for a quarter or a year. If they are capable of doing that, they are capable of getting rid of excess labor.

Now, when he says this is planning ahead, I assume he is responding to the idea that they have fomented the ideology ahead of time, since back in 2016 in regards to this recent brand of Christian Nationalist racism. As I implied the ideology was asserted on their base in order to create the material conditions necessary. For this to be a problem, this has to assume it is not or has not been the norm forever. Racism has always been a tool to encourage labor extraction and divide the working class.

In Conclusion

Anti-Mexican sentiment is not a feature of racism because racism is fun. It’s a set of conditions meant to address the contradictions of capitalism and our current circumstance. I am a Materialist, not an Idealist. The elite are ideological because of material conditions, not because ideas move history.

I once heard a friend describe the Zoot Suit Riots as, “White people getting mad that brown people have too much drip.” Upon studying the specifics of the Zoot Suits Riots and the United States condemnation of the Zoot Suits I thought, “No, it was about conserving fabric for the war.” Upon becoming a leftist I realized the Zoot Suits Riots were, “White people getting mad that brown people have too much drip,” and it really is that simple. Zoot Suits are an interesting piece of attire, they're bulky, flamboyant, high waisted, and look like a nightmare in even a little heat. But it's striking to see someone repping the Pachuco aesthetic in the modern world. What I didn't know until I started researching for this article, is that Zoot Suits originally were a Black thing before they were a Chicano thing, first becoming prominent in Black comedy shows in the 1920’s. While the specifics differ between our cultures the tendency to wear a bulky, flamboyant, high waisted, suit that looks like a nightmare in even a little heat is shared.

During the 1940’s, while World War 2 was ongoing, Zoot Suits were declared unpatriotic by the government due to the excessive use of fabric, which was deemed to be needed for the war. This rationing caused many people to adopt much more modest clothing as a show of support for the war, the Pachuco, however, did not.

The name “Zoot Suits Riots” brings to mind an image of a bunch of Pachucos smashing windows for some undisclosed, presumably civil rights adjacent, reason. In reality it was a bunch of American Servicemen assaulting and stripping Chicano Men, Teens, and Boys in the street as well as beating them for the crime of not aligning with the will of a hostile social order that produced these very conditions. Many Chicanos were jailed for the instance but no servicemen were. The servicemen took personal offense to the Chicanos refusing to comply with the state and took action of their own. Effectively by deeming a certain way of life as unnatural or unpatriotic, the state was able to manufacture an early form of Stochastic Terrorism in which, Servicemen, encouraged by newspapers they read took a culture war issue into their own hands.

Contraband and the War Production Board

During World War 2 the War Production Board was formed to oversee the distribution of resources in the US making sure important resources were used for things like tanks, guns, uniforms, etc. To achieve this they opted to outright ration how much materials could be utilized in non-war effort productions and effectively banned the production of some things entirely. One such item was the Zoot Suit due to its high use of fabric. But beyond that there was no federal ban on wearing a Zoot Suit. However, many people opted to wear modest clothing as an act of Performative Patriotism so no one could forget they support the American Soldiers in the war.

As you can imagine people without rights in this country, many of whom were forced to serve as well or were active in manufacturing products for the war out of material necessity, did not feel the same patriotism towards the US that whites did. So, why would they comply with an aesthetic order that amounts essentially to a dress code for the honor of a state that hates you. The continued wearing of Zoot Suits was a defiant act and that's why it was despised by white Americans. There's nothing inherently unpatriotic about a certain suit, but that didn't stop American Servicemen from leaping into action and committing state violence for free.

Trans Bodies as Contraband

A parallel I've seen in the modern world, in which certain people are declared unpatriotic is the the so-called “trans issue” which magically didn't exist until 2016. With the state trying to legislate trans people out of existence it feels like the Zoot Suit ban, a meaningless move more meant to signal a distaste than anything practical. The state can ban gender affirming care that's fine I will DIY, the state can ban AMAB people from wearing women's clothing, that's fine I will anyways, the state can mandate I use the men's restroom that's fine I'll go make everyone uncomfortable even if it puts my life in danger. But that's the point isn't it?

The State does not care about bathrooms. The bathroom is merely the theater of enforcement. Just as the violent servicemen did not care about fabric, the legislature does not care about women's sports. They care about defining a 'Standard Citizen' and deputizing the public to hunt down anyone who deviates from that standard. The State engages in Stochastic Terrorism to enforce gender normativity on every level because they don't want us to feel safe and don't want to have to directly destroy us themselves. But that's crazy isn't it?

State Mandated Violence

Many people on the anti-trans side even have encouraged lynch mobs against Trans Women which is why we now have a phenomenon of Cis Women being harassed in bathrooms on account of being tall, having short hair, or having a deep voice.

There is even a statistical correlation between anti-trans rhetoric and anti-trans violence.1 Just as labelling a Zoot Suit unpatriotic and essentially banning it from public life rhetorically, the state manifested their desired result, the public enforcing their beliefs on their behalf. The same can be said for anti-immigrant rhetoric. It is not a coincidence that while the Republican Party is promoting things like great replacement theory school shooters are citing it in their manifestos. State rhetoric begets extralegal violence. This is what I mean by Stochastic Terrorism.

Why Scapegoat Us?

At a time where food prices are at an all time high, housing is unaffordable, the job market sucks, and everyone is tired, why are we focusing on groups like Trans People and immigrants? It's because these things are no longer within the State’s control. These things will get worse and worse as the system built by the capitalist class collapses under it's own contradictions.

The actions of the Neo-Liberal era have essentially doomed us all and the state has lost control of the wheel. So instead of putting bandaid fixes on the situation to dampen the impact they've opted to pretend the problem doesn't exist at all. Instead, that immigrant working in a field for less than minimum wage is why you can't get a job. Instead of addressing male violence, that Trans Woman is the real predator, you just need a man to keep you safe from yourself you poor stupid woman. It's all a distraction in the purest form.

We now see two different ways of life reduced to illegality over perceptions of purity. In a similar way to conservative politicians trying to legislate my body and how I can and can not present the solution to the Zoot Suit Riots was a ban on the Zoot Suit in Los Angeles county. Not a condemnation of the Servicemen but a statement that amounts to, “It’s for your own good, just stop.” But I guess during the Zoot Suit Riots, there were probably “fine people on both sides.”

It Was Never About Fabric

The Zoot Suit Ban was a ban on a way of life, not a ban on wastefulness. Simultaneously, attempted bans on Trans Healthcare are a ban on a way of life, not a solution to Cis Male violence. Trans People have exist forever so to think that we just started using bathrooms in 2016 is insane. What do you think we were doing before that? For the time being the Trans Issue is a crazy distraction, a crazy distraction with very real consequences that will continue to escalate. But, for some groups this is life or death. Let's talk about the elephant in the room.

If you had the misfortune of having to immigrate here you now face the risk of deportation or possibly worse by an American Gestapo which has essentially been formed by deputizing the most worthless shills society has to offer, people after the sign on bonus, people empowered by hatred and bigotry, and people who are willing to just follow orders to the bitter end. The state has now formalized its own hateful rhetoric and Stochastic Terrorism.

By fomenting a fear of immigrants the state created a situation where enough people are willing to give state violence a pass to deal with them. In this instance the state’s passive engagement in violent rhetoric has passed from just encouraging violent actors to a full on Nazi death squad at the personal control of Trump himself.

Subscribe now

In Conclusion

At times like this it's important to live defiantly. If you're Queer, a POC, an Immigrant, etc. it's now more important than ever for you to live and live loud. We will not be forced into submission or silence no matter how many times they try. But more important than anything else we must remember this radical spirit can not die with Trump.

At the end of his time whether he dies of old age or his term ends there will be a collective sigh of relief and a desire to drop our guard, but we can't do this. The Biden presidency was essentially just that, we thought Trump was gone and felt a peace that has since been shaken. The Biden era was a sedative. It was the illusion that the machine had stopped grinding, when it had only quieted down. We cannot afford to be sedated again. Whether the boot is red or blue, it is still on our neck. Existence is resistance, fuck ICE, and be gay, do crime.

Share

The ‘Mexican’ in the American imagination is not a person,1 it is a volume knob. It is a dial that the Capitalist State turns up when the harvest is ready, and turns down when the profit margin shrinks. They are not citizens or neighbors, they are a Commodity Function. This case is made well in this article, so for the 1 year anniversary of its publication, I thought I’d give my take.

CHICANO RANTS

Sí, Se Puede: A Journey Through History and Identity

Hi Friends…

Read more

a year ago · 6 likes · Joseph Arroyo

There is 1 specific piece that sticks out to me in it.

The construction of ‘Mexican’ into a one-dimensional ‘commodity function and utility’ devalued nearly everything that held meaning for Mexicans—the individual self, family, culture, and political experience.

To give context, the article talks about the Bracero Program during World War 2 and how Mexicans were at times seen as a productive force in America and at others seen as a waste of resources. America has a recurring problem, it needs cheap labor, but only for a little while.

Braceros or Day Laborers were Mexicans (not Chicanos) who came to America as part of the Bracero Program, the largest guest work program in US history. The US used immigrant labor to work in agricultural roles during the Second World War to counteract a labor shortage. Interestingly enough, the Braceros even had legal protections you would not expect for that time such as:

1. A minimum wage

2. Adequate living conditions

3. Draft protections

4. And inclusion in white only spaces

At this point Mexicanness2 was defined as “hard worker” or “good neighbor.” However, the war ended and the economy slowed meaning that the Braceros needed to leave to open up room for American Labor. Quickly the definition of Mexicanness was changed to “illegal alien” or “criminal” with Operation Wetback. The military was employed to track, round up, and deport all the excess labor and the public was atomized against the Bracero to achieve this end. Suddenly people they were forced to share their coveted white only spaces with were now being presented as something trashy or lesser.

The Industrial Reserve Army of Labor

Karl Marx argued that capitalism requires an Industrial Reserve Army of Labor to function.

But if a surplus labouring population is a necessary product of accumulation or of the development of wealth on a capitalist basis, this surplus population becomes, conversely, the lever of capitalistic accumulation, nay, a condition of existence of the capitalist mode of production. It forms a disposable industrial reserve army, that belongs to capital quite as absolutely as if the latter had bred it at its own cost…The industrial reserve army, during the periods of stagnation and average prosperity, weighs down the active labour-army; during the periods of over-production and paroxysm, it holds its pretensions in check…If its accumulation, on the one hand, increases the demand for labour, it increases on the other the supply of labourers by the “setting free” of them, whilst at the same time the pressure of the unemployed compels those that are employed to furnish more labour, and therefore makes the supply of labour, to a certain extent, independent of the supply of labourers.

Karl Marx, Capital Volume One, Ch 35-Section 3

Essentially a certain number of people must be unemployed at all times in order to instill fear of poverty in the average worker, making them much easier to discipline. Historically, Mexicans have made a perfect choice to fill that role, a labor force that is present enough to work but absent enough to be deported the moment profit margins shrink.

This is not just “racism,” it is Imperialist Labor Extraction. During times of economic boom Mexicans are needed so rhetoric softens. Mexicans are allowed to come either with or without documentation, but then when the economy slows to a bust the excess labor needs to be removed so rhetoric hardens and deportations begin. Following this format the Mexican becomes essentially a volume knob of the labor market that can be turned up or down. It’s not an accident this format is still being followed today.

The reason rhetoric towards Mexicans is hardening in the modern world is because we are in an economic downturn. Thus the excess labor we have accumulated needs to be bled off to maintain the contradictions of Capitalism. The problem is, this labor is not possible to replace because U.S. workers will NOT take agricultural jobs.3 Essentially the agriculture industry is dependent on an undocumented labor force because the work is grueling and often requires less than minimum wage pay to be profitable. But, this creates a power dynamic where deportation is threatened to these immigrant workers to keep wages and benefits low and/or non-existent.

Essentially, we have created a Dialectic of the Disposable Body, the U.S. relies on Mexican labor as a resource but simultaneously, both due to racism and to keep labor costs low, Mexicanness is constructed to be inherently vulnerable but paradoxically, also robust. Think of a bee hive, individually the bees are pretty worthless and not a real distinct threat to anyone nor are they an inherently productive force. As a conglomeration of labor they create complex structures and surplus amounts of delicious honey, particularly in captivity in which in return for the oversight of the beekeeper in helping get rid of bad honeycomb and help in proliferation, the beekeeper keeps the excess.

Should something happen to a bee nothing bad really happens to the hive. The bee is just another drone that's easily replaceable. Because of the existence of such a network you need not worry about any one bee because you have a force of other disposable bodies behind it. This is why it's easy to conceive, for the average racist or indifferent white person, of a world in which this immigrant labor force is fine working without the benefit of healthcare like Medicare even in a medical system where necessary medical treatment can and will ruin you forever. You are vulnerable on every level whether it be healthcare, wages, or citizenship status, which you have only as long as the bee keeper needs you. But, the volume knob can always be turned back up when needed.

How to Turn a Person into a Thing

This dehumanization and creation of a “One-Dimensional” image of Mexicans in the United States is not a bug caused by an implicit or unconscious racism, instead it is a feature meant to keep Mexicans replaceable. György Lukács spoke of Reification or the process where social relations between people are seen as relations between things. The self, family, and culture of Mexicans and Chicanos are devalued in the minds of white America so that these arrangements do not seem absurd.

In order to create a system so cruel you need to strip Mexicans down to just another garden tool to be used as needed and then discarded. Mexicanness is very useful when we want to benefit but other than that it gets in the way. Mexicans are treated as a commodity not as people and that is why Mexicans are so disposable to the state.

In Conclusion

Mexicanness is constructed not out of preconceived notions, but instead out of material necessity from the Capitalist in order to create this accessible but disposable army of labor. The current phenomenon of mass deportations and anti-latino hatred is not a feature of ideology, the ideology is pushed on the public to warrant the expulsion of excess labor. This is why we are seeing the ICE deportations happening now. It isn't simply a feature of racism, instead the racism is created to explain the labor market which must be corrected via bleeding off excess labor due to the contradictions of Capitalism.

Subscribe now

The Chicano Sock Check is not a critique of fashion or style, it is a test of a foo’s Ontological character. The question, “How high are your socks,” is rooted in a recognition of tradition and a compliance to the outstanding culture that produced it. When a foo’ asks another foo' how high their socks are they are not checking for an adherence to aesthetics nor is it a direct test of will either. The statement is meant to identify who is in line with the culture and who is not.

It is simultaneously an in-joke that will weed out outsiders, the average white boy is not familiar with the sock check or at the least will present confusion when given such a challenge. It is also a means of testing who is most aware of how they are perceived within their immediate circle by those they share a community with. To strive to keep your socks high is to maintain alignment with your community’s expectation similar to ironing a shirt or pants. The loss by not doing so is a loss of social credibility while the gain is only to prevent such a loss with minimal to no tangible benefit. Lastly, the sock check correlates to a Foo's willingness to represent their culture. The socks are often covered by long shorts or pants meaning that you must be put together in the anticipation of presenting, not only when asked.

While the adherence to said aesthetic is often confined to the Cholo subculture meaning other subcultures or aesthetics such as the Edgar, the No Sabo Kid, etc. might not adhere but are often aware of the concept. It's not uncommon for Latino teens to sock check each other as a social media trend. In this instance the act is sublated within its cultural context. While no one thinks of the sock check as a true indication of resolve, a level of appreciation and temporary status is placed on those who pass the sock check even to people not part of the specific subculture that birthed the act.

I say sublated because simultaneously the act is parodied in doing this, but the temporary status placed on people who meet the expectation serves to reinforce the status of the aesthetic it seeks to emulate. It is turned into a ritual by elevating it to an indication of shared culture with the center of this ritual being the Cholo or the “down-ass foo” thus making the highest good in this scenario an idealized form of the Cholo.

To be the Downest Foo’

I would like to pose this question. If higher socks equate to a Foo's downness, then who was the Downest Foo? In reality it is difficult to point to a single individual. The tradition is not linked to a specific person known for being the most down like that of a frontier hero. There most definitely is a Foo out there with the highest socks in material reality, but this most definitely does not correlate to him being the most down. In this instance there is a distinction between appearance and essence. This individual appears to be the downest, according to the tradition, but is truthfully not essentially that. Instead the sock check is part of a larger tendency of down-ass Foos wearing their socks high. You are thus emulating not a person but a higher ideal held by the collective unconscious of Foos. The point of doing a sock check is to bridge the gap between the higher ideal of the Chicano and the reality of an individual. There is no Foo who is the downest.

Why Sock Check?

The sock check presents more outside of the culture than it does simply within it. The dialectic of those who pass the sock check to those who are ineligible is as important as the dialectic of those who pass and do not pass the sock check. As mentioned it serves to separate those who are part of the culture from those who are not as a social litmus test. It is not common for a Foo to sock check someone who is not Chicano, and should this situation arise, the expectation of passing does not hold the same weight. Even many other people of color are not familiar with the sock check, as I've come to find out. Essentially outsiders are separated unconsciously without needing a sock check simply by considering if they are worthy of being sock checked.

However, the fact that someone is eligible for a sock check does not mean they're fit for a sock check. Most retired down-ass Foos, think of the older Chicano who grew up in the hood but is now a family man, will respond positively to the sock check, oftentimes making a joke about how they were caught lacking in the instance.

The reception demonstrates a loyalty to Chicano culture, even if the expectation is not held as a personal code of conduct. There does however exist a tendency from some people who willingly separate themselves from these cultural elements for various reasons.

Whether it be a disavowal of the perceived ghetto elements as a means to separate oneself from the stigma attached or even a distaste for these elements due to breaking a chain of historic poverty and thus seeking to present the part. To clarify, the nature of simply not dressing like a hood foo' does not equate to a rejection of the culture. Most people who are the first to achieve material success, the quintessential “getting out of the hood,” retain large aspects of their identity within themselves either actively or passively.

When I talk about people rejecting these cultural elements I am referring to people who actively distance themselves from things they grew up with and actively shame others for not doing the same. By doing this you treat your own culture, your past, and even a younger version of yourself as lesser. This is usually out of a desire to appease white people and thus assimilate to the hostile culture. Whether it's for the purpose of negating racism, finding closer alignment to people you agree with ideologically (many conservative Chicanos are that simply due to religious values), or a deeply held shame or guilt related to past poverty, assimilation is many times perceived as a necessity or something to be desired.

But there also exist people who do not do this out of their own will. There are plenty of people, myself included, who had this thrust upon them by parental figures. By raising your children devoid of certain cultural elements, especially ones you grew up around, you effectively opt for them to not be able to connect to certain parts of their culture. This is where we get our no sabo kids.

I grew up knowing some things but not others. I knew what a sock check was, I knew to call friends Foo' or güey/wey, I knew how to cuss in Spanish, I knew how to identify Sureño and Norteño gang tags, but some things I couldn't do until later, when I sought these skills out myself were speaking Spanish, cooking Mexican food, or even articulating what part of Mexico my family is from. In essence the only thing I was allowed to do that is part of my culture was my family's bad habits.

This is why white washed Chicanos often make bad representatives of the culture. By not being given the full context you have all the bad habits without a full understanding of the context in which they arose. Your understanding is based often on stereotypes as that might be all you have to go off of so what more can you do if not just transmit the bad?

This is where the sock check comes into play. It is important to sock check someone not on the grounds of their commitment to an aesthetic, but on how committed they are to the culture. While it's really not one’s place to tell anyone they do not or no longer belong within a context related to ethnic or cultural identity, some people must be treated as others because they do not represent the culture in an uplifting way. Think of “Uncle Tom” discourse but for the Chicano Community. People who actively sell out, seek to harm, or disrespect the culture often hide behind the identity when it suits them, but are nowhere to be found when it's time to represent it. The simple act of not being educated on our history is not a valid reason to exclude someone but an active disrespect might be just that. In this instance the sock check is now a form of praxis meant to vet those who themselves have rejected their community.

The Historic Inevitability of Down-Ass Foo’s, High Socks, and Sock Checks

So, how did we get here? How did a tube sock become a theological object? To understand the Drip, we must understand the State Violence that created it. To do this we must first understand early Chicano aesthetics and how it gave rise to the Cholo aesthetic. Prior to LA being the center of Latino gangs the origin point of this was El Paso, Texas which was essentially the Ellis Island of the southwest. Here the Pachuco aesthetic was imported from Mexico and became ubiquitous with the Chicano. This aesthetic subculture gave rise to small sets of young men who would claim territory often in defense of other such groups similar to the origins of the Bloods and the Crips. They started not as criminal enterprises but instead as friend cliques and boys clubs. Teenage boys hang out, someone develops a personal beef with another member of one of these boys clubs, thus their block becomes a no-go-zone for their opposition. “We don't fuck with you, so you're not welcome here.” That is how we get territorial gangs.

When WW2 began, many traveled west to California for wartime jobs where they were met with harsh segregation era policies. Chicanos could not use white parks, pools, or social clubs. Sports and Car culture have always been a part of Chicano culture, and immediately felt the impact. In the face of segregation, Chicano sports teams and car clubs were forced to create their own territory out of response to their exclusion from others, hence the rise of the barrios such as in East LA. Disputes would arise with similar teams and clubs of white boys thus creating a racial gang violence similar to how most gangs operate now.

Following the US government’s condemnation of the Zoot Suits, worn by the Pachucos, thus inciting the infamous Zoot Suit Riots during the second world war, the Zoot Suits became a symbol of defiance against the government. Citing the high fabric cost the government labeled the Zoot Suit as “unpatriotic,” this led many white servicemen to assault and strip young Chicano men of their Zoot Suits in public nonetheless. This gradually contributed to the Pachuco going out of style.

During the 1970’s and 80’s the mass incarcerations gave the final piece to the puzzle. Tube socks were issued to prisoners, who would hike them up above the boot line to prevent chafing during prison labor. Similarly to how sagging largely made its way to Black hood culture as a post-prison cultural phenomenon, the high socks made its way out for Chicanos. The world has been hard for Chicanos since first immigrating to America or since the border crossed many of us, so when society demands you become a down-ass foo the only thing to do is pull yourself up by your tube socks and get to work.

Because of this, the high socks became an indicator of who has been to prison. As it becomes something the new homies see the OG’s doing, it is emulated and now comes to represent who has proximity to the gang lifestyle. As LA has become less saturated in gang violence compared to the 90’s it becomes more an indication of having grown up in certain areas.

In short, the Cholo aesthetic arose out of the material conditions of the Chicano, not as a fashion statement like the Pachuco did. This is why the Cholo is the highest ideal of the Chicano. I bet you never thought that the Cholo would be compared to the Platonic Form of the Chicano. It's a distinctly Chicano outgrowth that has even been exported, not just to Latin America, but also other places you wouldn't expect, namely Japan. In the rest of the world when someone thinks “Chicano” they think of the Cholo, thus the Cholo is the Platonic Form of the Chicano, existing in the mind separate from active perception.

Now that you understand this history, do not disregard down-ass Foos as simply thugs or criminals, think of the Foo as a more advanced form of the Pachuco. One that has evolved and formed a synthesis with the material conditions presented.

Subscribe now

In Conclusion

The sock check is a recognition of historical conditions within a community, not a form of fashion policing. Cultural elements like this are important to maintain because they speak to a history not just to an individual’s taste or preference. Beyond that it is important that we instill traditions even perceived as ghetto or trashy within our community because people of color are the only people who are expected to apologize for the historic conditions we exist under and the distasteful things done as a result, whereas white people often praise theirs as important history that can not be attacked or questioned.

The difference is aesthetics like the Cholo arose not out of violence or genocide like many parts of white culture, they are actually an outgrowth of those actions against us. I would like to leave you with a final question to ponder after reading this. How high are your socks, foo?

If this analysis helped you align your verticality with the ancestors, share this post.

Share

If your socks are low, unsubscribe and reflect on your material conditions.