Columbia City Paper

Dear Mexican: Many times, as I cross the border into the U.S., I see bald cholos buying images (posters, blankets, baby bibs) of Al Pacino in Scarface. Where does such an obsession for this ugly Cuban come from? Is Tony Montana replacing la Virgencita de Guadalupe in cholos� living rooms across America?

Proud to be an Illegal Alien

Dear Wab: Author Ken Tucker recently published Scarface Nation: The Ultimate Gangster Movie and How It Changed America,
but save some money and refry this: The basis for the popularity of
Tony Montana is the same as why Bonnie and Clyde became folk heroes
during the Great Depression, la misma razón porque Dubya was re-elected in 2004 and George Armstrong Custer was so popular�America loves its up-from-stupidity outlaws. Cholos, on the other hand, love Montana for the obvious reason: por pendejos.
I get the socioeconomic rationale for Montana�s deification in thug
culture�his rise from poverty through riches via machismo, guile and
the white chica�but Mexicans who worship him insult our culture for falling under the spell of a paisan playing a coño.
Whatever happened to the days when the killers Mexicans
lionized�Emiliano Zapata, Pancho Villa, Gregorio Cortez�slaughtered for
the hood that was la raza? Not only that, but the celebration of drug kingpins in Mexico? [Answer redacted by the Mexican�s editor because he doesn�t want his prize wab to end up in a ditch!]

I�m
Hispanic, not Mexican, and I hate it when people mistake me for one. I
don�t like the stupid music you like, I don�t give a fuck about the
stupid Virgin of Guadalupe, I don�t speak with the stupid accent, I
don�t even look like an Indian. Why should all Hispanics be confused
with these stupid, ignorant people?

One High-Spanic

Dear Wab: Because that�s your best shot to join our Reconquista.

I
was talking to my uncle a few weeks ago, and he mentioned something to
the effect that, as part of the original postwar agreement between the
United States and Mexico after their 1848 war, Mexican citizens were
originally supposed to be able to go back and forth as they pleased. I
know that the original draft was changed. Unfortunately, I don�t have
the time to do further research. If it�s true, I guess them Mexican
illegals aren�t illegal�they�re simply exercising the terms of the
postwar agreement.

El Niño Héroe

Dear
Heroic Child: Your uncle was partially right. Article IX of the Treaty
of Guadalupe Hidalgo originally stated that �the relations and
communication between the Catholics living in the territories
[conquered by the United States during the Mexican-American War] and
their respective ecclesiastical authorities shall be open, free and
exempt from all hindrance whatever, even although such authorities
should reside within the limits of the Mexican Republic, as defined by
this treaty; and this freedom shall continue, so long as a new
demarcation of ecclesiastical districts shall not have been made,
conformably with the laws of the Roman Catholic Church.� In other
words, Mexican Catholics could cross between the two countries for
religious purposes and no one else. However, American authorities
removed this provision from Article IX before signing the treaty. Don�t
believe the Chicano Studies urban myth that said the treaty guaranteed
bilingual rights for Mexicans, or that such a provision would even
apply to the Mexicans who now live in the American Southwest, very few
of whom have historical ties to the conquered Mexicans. Better yet,
let�s all just get over the fact that the Southwest United States once
belonged to Mexico�as I�ve written before, Mexico ruled those
territories from 1812 until 1848, a chronological fart between the
much-longer reigns of the Spaniards (212 years), gabachos (158 years) and the Native Americans (eternal).

Bookmark It