| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstEssay" |
|---|
It is strongly recommended that you include your outline in the body of your essay by using the outline as section titles. The headings below are there to remind you how section and subsection titles are formatted. | |
<
< | Statehood will not decolonize Puerto Rico | >
> | Why not statehood? | | | -- By ValeriaFlores - 22 Feb 2021
Introduction | |
<
< | In 1898, the United States colonized Puerto Rico and kept it under military rule until 1900, when the Foraker Act established the Island’s civil government. A governor was to be appointed by the U.S. President and Puerto Rico would be represented in the Mainland by a Resident Commissioner with no vote in Congress. In 1917, the Jones Act granted Puerto Ricans U.S. citizenship with the caveat that they could not vote for the U.S. President and remained unrepresented in Congress. In 1952, with Congress’s ratification of Puerto Rico’s Constitution, the Island became a “Commonwealth” subject to the applicable provisions of the U.S. Constitution, the term “applicable” left undefined. In 2021, 104 years after the passage of the Jones Act, nothing has changed. In the face of what seems like a mere legal and political landscape that furthered Puerto Rico’s social, economic and political inequity, many think of statehood as the great equalizer. Statehood, however, will not decolonize Puerto Rico. | >
> | In my last essay draft, I did not offer an explanation of why statehood would not decolonize Puerto Rico, but rather wrote about the exploitative and colonial relationship the United States holds with Puerto Rico. Upon receiving comments, I could not think of many reasons why statehood would not, in a practical and literal sense, decolonize Puerto Rico. That was because it could, and I had wrote that essay as a way to unsuccessfully convince myself it could not. I was forced to look inward and I realized that convincing myself statehood would not change Puerto Rico’s condition is something I have been doing for years, and now I have to understand why. | | | | |
<
< | Colonization is not merely about legal or political power | >
> | Independence and Statehood | | | | |
<
< | In 1901, the Supreme Court held that Puerto Rico is an unincorporated territory inhabited by an alien race that belongs to but is not a part of the United States. Ideally, then, the path to decolonization is to become a part of the U.S. and enjoy all of the rights under its Constitution. But because this is not an ideal world, it is hard to believe that Puerto Rico could ever truly be a part of the country that seized it amidst a war and has kept it a colony ever since. For Puerto Ricans like me, voting for the U.S. President and electing representatives in Congress does not change anything, and the colonization of our Island will not be fixed with the grant of more legal or political power. The colonization of Puerto Rico is about the United States’ racism towards Puerto Ricans. Becoming a U.S. state will not change that. | >
> | Where I grew up, it would have been inconceivable for someone to favor statehood. The majority of professors in my high school and people around me favored independence, and that was instilled in me, and every other student, from the start. We were taught about the invasion, the experiments, the killings, all done by the U.S. military on Puerto Rican soil. I cannot think of one single professor or student that favored statehood, or that would even talk about it as a viable option for the Island’s status. | | | | |
<
< | Colonization is about racism, bigotry and prejudice | >
> | I wanted to study in the U.S. upon graduating high school, which some of my friends thought was betrayal. I ended up staying in the Island and went to the University of Puerto Rico, a university that is known for its favoring of independence. I did not fit in from the start, and it was the first time I questioned whether independence would be an attainable option for Puerto Rico. However, every time I thought about statehood as the alternative, I always remembered our history with the United States and brushed it off quickly. | | | | |
<
< | The history I learned in high school is very different from what I saw online about our relationship with the U.S. My high school was very liberal, and most of my professors favored Puerto Rico’s independence, which is not something you see very often. While other schools taught our relationship with the U.S. from a legal perspective, students in my school learned about how that colonial relationship was built not simply upon legal or political means, but upon racism, bigotry and prejudice towards Puerto Ricans. | >
> | Racism and Identity | | | | |
<
< | The United States' exploitive relationship with Puerto Rico | >
> | Part of why I do not want Puerto Rico to become a state has to do with the racism I encounter whenever I am in the U.S. It has shaped how I see myself and my identity. The first time I visited the U.S., I was asked that if I claimed to be from Puerto Rico, how come my English was so good. Because I have blue eyes, someone told me I was exotic and did not look Puerto Rican at all. I once attended a conference on legal ethics and the speaker asked if there was anyone from outside the U.S. I raised my hand and said I was from Puerto Rico, to which he responded, “you’re basically ours, just a matter of paperwork.” These and countless other encounters have made me think that it would be impossible, with the current racism and micro-aggressions towards Puerto Ricans, for us to ever truly be a part of the U.S. | | | | |
<
< | We learned that according to the United States secretary of war, Puerto Rico was to remain a colony because its Caribbean people did not know “the lesson of self-control and respect for the principles of the constitutional government.” The secretary of state added that Puerto Ricans knew nothing of the “art of self-government or any real honest government.” We learned that the lesson of self-control was taught primarily by assimilation. Soon after the invasion, the U.S. started its mission to civilize Puerto Ricans. | >
> | Statehood as a solution | | | | |
<
< | We learned about how the U.S. has used Puerto Rico as a research laboratory for decades. Agent Orange, the herbicide used by the U.S. military during the Vietnam War, was tested in Puerto Rico in 1964. It was tested in the Luquillo Experimental Forest, a beautiful Puerto Rican forest the USDA Crops Research determined was similar to the ones in Asia. The military hoped Agent Orange would defoliate the forest, and that’s exactly what it did. Almost 60 years later, Agent Orange is now associated with seven types of cancer, and the people of Puerto Rico suffer the consequences.
We learned about the effects of colonization in our women. The U.S. sought to control the population growth in “developing countries,” and it came to Puerto Rico. Around 1930, U.S. doctors and surgeons took advantage of poor, uneducated Puerto Rican women and promoted sterilizations as the only effective contraceptive method. Some women did not even know the procedure they were consenting to, and forced sterilizations in the Island rose. By 1948, 7% of Puerto Rican women were sterilized. Around 1906, the first contraceptive pill was tested in the Island with women who were not even informed they were participating in a clinical trial or the possible side effects of the pill. The practice was the same, this time through pills rather than operations.
What struck me the most was when we learned about Cornelius Rhoads. A pathologist in the Rockefeller Institute, Rhoads came to Puerto Rico to do cancer research. Instead, he wrote a letter to his peers in which he depicted his actual work in the Island: "Porto Ricans are beyond doubt the dirtiest, laziest, most degenerate and thievish race of men ever inhabiting this sphere. What the island needs is not public health work but a tidal wave or something to totally exterminate the population. I have done my best to further the process of extermination by killing of 8.” | >
> | If I leave aside the history, my personal experiences and desire to see my Island free someday, statehood can be the better option. We would be able to vote for the President and to be represented in Congress, granting us political power over our government. We would be treated as U.S. citizens both on and off the mainland. We would receive more funding and the same benefits the other 50 states do. We would enjoy all of the rights under the U.S. Constitution. All of this and more would translate into tangible change in the lives of many Puerto Ricans. On the contrary, becoming independent would be very difficult. Puerto Rico has been a colony for most of its existence, first a colony of Spain, then of the U.S. We never had an opportunity to develop an economy or a government of our own. With our current $74 billion debt, it would be almost impossible to build our own economy and government system in a way that would not take the time we cannot afford. Our local government would not be a solution to this, for it has almost always been corrupt, and all it knows is to work towards the preferred status of the party in power. Further, we would lose our U.S. citizenship, which affords us, among many things, the liberty to come, go and stay, especially when so many Puerto Ricans have family in the U.S. It is very hard to predict Puerto Rico’s future if it were to become independent, and as perfect as the option may seem given the relationship between the Island and the U.S., it is rather utopian. | | | Conclusion | |
<
< | If this exploitive relationship were an issue of the past, then maybe statehood would decolonize Puerto Rico. All the Island would need is a grant of constitutional rights. That is not the case. As recent as four years ago, immediately after hurricane Marķa struck the Island, U.S. President Trump blithely threw toilet paper at Puerto Ricans who had lost their homes and loved ones before saying Puerto Ricans want “everything done for them.” Puerto Rico becoming a U.S. state will not decolonize it, it will only reaffirm this exploitive, racist relationship and finally complete the process of assimilation the U.S. has instilled in Puerto Ricans for over a century. It will not magically end the years of racism, bigotry and prejudice. Instead, they will go on. As long as Puerto Rico remains tied to the U.S., it will remain colonized. | >
> | Our history with the U.S. is what keeps me from favoring statehood. The Foraker Law and the Jones Act paved the way for the U.S. Congress to decide what would be locally applicable to Puerto Rico and what would not be. In the Insular Cases, the Supreme Court has stated for years that our U.S. citizenship does not stand for all of the rights under the U.S. Constitution. Puerto Ricans have been and are treated as second-class citizens, and Puerto Rico has been kept a colony because it has long benefitted the United States economically.
But the reality, one that I have tried to avoid and is finally time to recognized, is that becoming a U.S. state would benefit and decolonize Puerto Rico, even if not in the way I am looking for. It will not erase the past, but Puerto Ricans struggle with real issues that will be solved by statehood, whereas they could be exacerbated if we were to become independent. The change I am looking for does not necessarily rest on Puerto Rico’s status, but on a social change that is much deeper than that. | | | | |
<
< |
Until the last sentence, this draft had not addressed the most significant inquiry likely to be on the reader's mind: granting that statehood cannot accomplish decolonization, does that imply (1) that statehood is not a step in the direction of decolonization and (2) that statehood would not significantly improve the economic situation and other measurements of human welfare for Puerto Rican people? | | | | |
<
< | This is addressed at last, in the conclusion and in conclusory form by the final sentence. I think the best route to improvement is to incorporate this necessary part of the discussion into the draft from the top, in order to give the reader confidence that you intend to show not only that statehood is insufficient but that for articulated reasons it does not contribute to and retards the achievement of fundamental goals. | | | | |
<
< | The reader may well feel: (1) that if statehood would greatly improve peoples' lives while more generations needed to struggle for decolonization, it cannot be dismissed out of hand; (2) that many other people in the US must struggle with racism, with poverty, and with the history of hostility and exploitation from "above" in a system supposedly dedicated to equality. There are common goals and methods in those various struggles. Two US Senators from the State of Puerto Rico right now would have a near-revolutionary effect not only on the island's fortunes within the US, but on all those other struggles simultaneously. That's nothing to sneeze at, even though it isn't the decolonization of Puerto Rico. Engaging those ideas and explaining the grounds of your response helps the reader, and helps you. | | |
|
|