Revolutionizing Through the Mestiza Class

The Land of the Free mocks itself in order to distract its citizens from the caste system it imposed on them long before the Industrial Revolution. Perhaps the classes weren’t as distinct, black and white, before industrialization as they became afterwards, but to refute their existence is to refute the patriarchy this nation was founded upon. And to recognize the system as anything but caste – to misinterpret the American class system - is to ignore the realities, the institution, keeping it in place.

How firmly the class system is kept in place is wrapped up in this notion of liberal individualism – another component of America’s foundation. The Land of the Free announces both to American citizens and Global citizens that here, you have the ability to move up and down in the caste system as well as within the class you belong to. Never mind what the “pull yourself up by your boot straps” narrative ignores: SYSTEMIC OPPRESSION. Let’s consider the viability of the belief that citizens can move up and down and all around in the American caste system.

Though caught in the middle as a student in a university of wealthy Chicago-ites, I am working-class. From single-motherhood, waitressing, Dollar General school supplies, Ramen noodles, and assisted housing. The last year of my life has been one of transition in every dimension, but I have felt one of the greatest tensions in the relationship between my class identity and my identity as a student.

A working-class college student sounds like an oxymoron. (Mind you, that says working-class college student – not poor college student, and yes, there is a difference.) To negotiate a class identity seems absurd and unnecessary but for the class-conscious, personally aware individual, it is important to situate the self in a specific class with which to identify an upbringing, a culture, a belonging. If all of your life you have belonged to the working-class, then where do you belong once you’ve obtained an education? What happens when your eating habits change? What happens when you move to the other side of town? What happens when your speech, wardrobe, and perhaps even mannerisms change? What happens if they don’t????

Feminist theorist Gloria E. Anzaldua coined the term “mestiza” to mean a mixed identity - a state of being beyond binary constructions. Mestiza consciousness calls for an individual to be aware of her diverting and intersectional identities and accept that her identity – and the compilation of her many identities – does not fit on either side of the spectrum but rather, somewhere within it. It is easy to see how the mestiza consciousness relates to race, sexuality, even gender. But it seems improbable that an individual can belong to two classes at the same time.

There are some educated individuals coming from working-class backgrounds who never forget their roots and retain their classed upbringing, but they still live in a middle-class framework with a college degree, livable income, and professional career. To negotiate this reality is beyond complex and while it seems that claiming two class identities is both ignorant and idealistic, when understanding that class encompasses both a cultural and economic component, the mestiza class is entirely possible.

Economically, class refers to the amount of monetary income an individual or household receives on the average. Also included in this equation is the amount of people this income is supposed to support, the material lifestyle attempted to live, and the too often overlooked geographic location (which heavily determines the cost of living). In this sense, it is impossible to be of a mestiza class.

Culturally, class refers not only to the aforementioned economic component, but also to social customs and norms of a particular class identity. Mannerisms, language and speech, attire, eating habits, the way in which people interact with each other, even preferred entertainment are all cultural aspects of class identity. For example, country music is stereotypically thought of as a white working-class cultural norm while rap music is stereotypically seen as a black (potentially working-class) cultural norm. Beer is stereotypically associated with working-class people while fine wines are associated with wealthier people. Foods like shit on a shingle (country gravy over toast) and hamburger on a plate are typical foods of (white) working-class households whereas humus, steak, and caviar are typical of wealthier households. Levi jeans, Carhart products, and knock-offs are clothing that (largely white) working-class populations wear while name brands are available to wealthier populations. Improper grammar and ebonics are stereotypically associated with working-class peoples while proper grammar is a sign of an educated and wealthier individual. Of course, these are just a few quick examples and they vary when incorporating race, gender, and sexuality identities. But key to these examples is that there is a cultural distinction between classes that American society loves to ignore, ironically so as it is typically blatant in every day interactions each of us has with one another. In the U.S., you are hard pressed to find someone who doesn’t at least inherently know who/what is considered respectable and who/what is considered “trash”. While most people refuse to acknowledge that this construction of respectability is essentially a product of class and systemic oppression, it is imperative to recognize that these constructions do exist and for the benefit of the privileged institution.

So it is possible to maintain some, many, perhaps even all of the cultural components of an individual’s classed upbringing while shifting their economic component to make a mestiza class identity. My education will pull my economic status up but many of my social roots will remain the same. In getting rid of cultural factors in our upbringing, do we disregard where we came from, the people that shared the identity, our families? Do we better ourselves or do we accommodate for the lifestyle we want to live, and where does that want come from? It is clear that these questions would not exist if materiality were not so American – if patriarchy did not construct class identities in such a way as to privilege some for the oppression of others. What is key: the classed mestiza doing something revolutionary with the privilege earned.