In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

introduction m a g g i e r i v a s - r o d r í g u e z & e m i l i o z a m o r a The war in Europe and the subsequent entry of the United States into the world conflagration set the country on a path to build what President Franklin D. Roosevelt called “the arsenal of democracy.” The United States managed to assemble the required arsenal for the war, although it was not as successful in guaranteeing egalitarian values at home. War production nevertheless made possible the dramatic growth and expansion of the economy. It also allowed the United States to make a decisive contribution to the outcome of the war and to emerge from the hostilities as a major world power with imposing imperial designs. The martial spirit was no less significant at the home front. At least sixteen million men and women of varied social backgrounds gave expression to the heightened sense of national duty that overtook the country by agreeing to serve in the military.1 While the expansion of U.S. industrial capacity exceeded early wartime aims, the lofty wartime rhetoric of justice and equality for workers, women, and national minorities consistently fell short of declared expectations. The unprecedented and growing opportunities in employment, the single most important democratizing effect of the war, suggested a more equal and just society, but the change resulted more from an expanded wartime economy than from a more democratic and just society, as asserted in official pronouncements . Moreover, Latinos/as may have benefited from employment MAGGI E RI VAS-RO DRÍ GUEZ & EMILIO ZAMORA· 2 · opportunities to a lesser extent than other groups in U.S. society. Despite the unequal access to jobs, wartime opportunities pulled the country out of the hard times of the Depression and allowed hundreds of thousands of workers to improve their lives with higher-skilled and better-paying jobs. The public language of democracy and justice, coupled with continuing discrimination and inequality, also encouraged protests and claims of entitlement among marginalized groups, including the Mexican, Puerto Rican, and Cuban men and women who are at the center of this anthology.2 The focus on Latinos/as, or U.S. communities that trace their ancestry to the Spanish-speaking peoples in the Caribbean, Mexico, Central America , and South America, requires some conceptual explanation. An obvious point of departure is the assertion that Latinos/as are too diverse to be considered a single group of persons with markedly shared experiences. Obvious differences in nationality, class, race, culture, places of origin, and length of residence in the United States suggest different historical trajectories and contemporary sociocultural formations. Compelling similarities, however, are also evident. U.S. military, trade, and immigration policies, although varying in their intent and consequences in the history of relations with countries in the Americas, have produced generally similar results in the lives of Latinos/as. The history of U.S. expansionism during the last half of the nineteenth century , for instance, explains the absorption of one-half of Mexico’s northern territory, the establishment of a dependent commonwealth in Puerto Rico, and the tumultuous relationship that the United States continues to share with Cuba. In all these instances, the United States mediated its expanded economic influence with trade and immigration policies that regulated the movement of capital, manufacturing, goods, and technology abroad and Latino/a labor for low-wage work in the United States. Once in the United States, as well as in Puerto Rico, Latinos/as have been subjected to a process of racialization that set them socially and culturally apart from the rest of society as territorial minorities, working-class groups, racially distinct populations, and immigrant communities. The preponderant experience of immigration in the history of Latinos/as and their largely working-class status has also blurred intergroup differences and reinforced a view of sameness in the public imagination. Latinos/as have acted on this process by self-identifying as a distinct group and promoting pan-Latino/a views and interests. Recent works by Juan Gonzalez, Marcelo Suárez-Orozco, Mariela Páez, and José Alamillo remind us that scholars generally consider Latinos/as a dis- [3.145.23.123] Project MUSE (2024-04-25 14:46 GMT) I NTRODUCTION· 3 · tinct U.S. community and an appropriate category of analysis, although they do not always explain the pan-Latino/a identity that they use or consistently acknowledge the obvious conceptual challenge.3 Gonzalez, for instance, uses...

Share