A New Portrait of Cesar Chavez: Hero or a Flawed Figure?

A new portrait of the labor leader paints him as a visionary figure with tragic flaws and frequent insensitivity. The rigorous New York Times report exposing decades of sexual abuse by Cesar Chavez against women and girls has been described by some as devastating to the Latino community. It is also true that for those of us who admired his fight for the rights of farmworkers, learning of his immense moral failings has been a huge disappointment. However, I refuse to admit that the actions of one person, regardless of their stature, can ruin the reputation of a community. Another misperception I notice in the reaction of the catastrophists is to assume that the Mexican community defines the entire U.S. Latino community. The Hispanic/Latino community is multinational and includes Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, Cubans, Salvadorans, Dominicans, Guatemalans, Colombians, Hondurans, Venezuelans, Ecuadorians, Argentines, Chileans; it is multiracial: there are whites, descendants of Africans, indigenous peoples, mestizos, Asians, and combinations of all the above; it is diverse culturally and linguistically; it speaks English, Spanish, Portuguese, Nahuatl, Quechua, Maya. Far from being a homogeneous community, the differences in identity, language, politics, and socioeconomic level are enormous. Chavez did not represent this vast universe. On the other hand, we must recognize that Chavez was the most famous Chicano in U.S. history and that his achievements were very important for a sector of the population. In the 60s, Chavez and his farmworkers union gained national prominence, and in 1975 his political strength was fundamental to achieving the passage of the Agricultural Labor Relations Act, the first in the country's history to protect the rights of farmworkers to organize. We must also recognize that, following the example of the 'Big Six' of the African American Movement in their fight for Racial Justice and Equality, Chavez promoted the civil rights of Latinos. But we must not forget that this is not the first time a professional journalist has painted a realistic portrait of Chavez's moral ambiguities. In 'The Crusades of Cesar Chavez,' published in 2014, while Miriam Pawel duly recognizes his 'profound humanity,' she challenges the traditional, almost sanctified heroic image that his followers attribute to him. In her book, Chavez emerges as a visionary but tragically flawed figure; as a brilliant strategist who often stumbles; and as a savvy, street-smart organizer but frequently insensitive. Pawel denounces his authoritarian leadership style; his resistance to adapting to changing labor conditions; his prioritization of ideological purity over practical achievements; his myopic protests at the border to prevent the entry of undocumented workers in cahoots with 'la Migra'; his indiscriminate use of 'purges' of Movement members who questioned him. I had the chance to hear the indignant criticism from community leaders who, instead of reflecting on the accusations against Chavez, judged Pawel for publishing them. And today, when I hear those who lived through his infamies and claim they did not denounce him so as not to harm 'The Cause,' I remember the criminal silence of the left, arguing that exposing Stalin's crimes was giving weapons to the right to harm the Soviet Union. Fortunately for history, the truth prevailed then and will prevail now, recognizing the merits of a fighter for justice who was lost along the way due to his deification and his ambition for power. I differ. It is evident that for the victims of his abuses, his perversity was and will continue to be an unforgivable offense. Simplifying it is reducing it to absurdity.