The Forgotten Tragedy of The National Chicano Moratorium

A show of unity that met with state violence.

The National Chicano Moratorium Anti-Vietnam War March, held on August 29, 1970, remains the largest-ever Mexican American protest. While the march itself is fairly well known, the results of the subsequent inquest seem to have been obscured from the media by the shadow of the Manson Murders. Whether this was deliberate or not is still a point of debate.

A Momentous Display of Unity

The march was one of the largest arranged by a single ethnic group in U.S. history, drawing an attendance estimated to be between 20,000 to 30,000 people. All marched against the Vietnam War. This was the third and largest moratorium march against the Vietnam War in Los Angeles since December 1969, occurring at a time when the political unrest surrounding the conflict was reaching fever pitch.

The protest was organised by the National Chicano Moratorium Committee (NCMC), chaired by Rosalío Muñoz. The primary issue they marched against was the unjust war and the disproportionately high casualty rate among Chicano soldiers.

Onstage at Laguna Park in 1970, Muñoz highlighted the dramatic growth of the movement. He recounted how, a year earlier, “there had been few of us,” but within twelve months, the Chicano anti-war movement and NCMC had become “a powerful force for social change.”

The war was not the only issue, though. Muñoz also stressed that the Chicano movement must address other forms of oppression, namely police brutality, telling listeners: “We have to bring an end to this oppression.” This march would ultimately serve as a crucible for both the Chicano Movement and local law enforcement, including the Los Angeles Police Department. Even Muñoz could not have predicted how symbolic that statement would be.

The Law Enforcement Crackdown

The demonstration was intended to be a peaceful march followed by a rally of like-minded individuals. Unfortunately, this was not to be.

Minutes after Rosalío Muñoz spoke, he watched as “a line of deputies… suddenly appeared on the edge of the park and started pushing forward.” The police had decided to disrupt the event at the very beginning, leading to tragic consequences.

The event rapidly dissolved into what has been described as a law enforcement-induced riot. Law enforcement’s response was brutal and excessive, as evidenced by participant accounts. A woman named Barba and a young boy named Billy, who were watching from a porch, later told the inquest, that they watched helplessly as a sheriff’s deputy approached an old woman and “beat her up with a baton on the head.”

She witnessed this sort of violence repeatedly, recalling, “Because two or three officers, and sometimes six, would get a boy, and would beat him up, and then they would go and get somebody else.” When deputies ordered her into a non-familial house, one deputy then threw tear gas at her and Billy; the projectile ended up gassing the young boy “right in the face.”

Consequences of the Chaos

These were not the only shocking stories that came to light. More devastating was the death of three people, including renowned journalist Ruben Salazar. (The subject of Monday’s article) Salazar was a Los Angeles Times columnist and a key advocate for Chicano struggles.

Los Angeles deputy sheriffs fired a tear-gas canister into the Silver Dollar Bar which struck Salazar on the head, killing him. The incident was captured by his photographer and co-editor, Raul Ruiz; otherwise, the official account may have gone unchallenged.

The other people who died during the march were Angel Gilberto Díaz and Lyn Ward. Brown was a Beret medic, who died from multiple contusions on his head, either from a projectile or a beating. This highlighted the severity of the violence used against the protesters.

Casualties were numerous as the approximately 1,500 police officers fired tear-gas canisters into the crowd. Hundreds of people were injured by tear gas, batons, and general chaos. Estimates of the injured vary.

Over 150 to 400 people were arrested in what was cited as the “largest urban uprising in California by people of colour since the Watts uprising of 1965.” The ensuing chaos and rioting led to significant property damage, estimated to be around $1 million.

It was an event that shaped the national Chicano movement and the Los Angeles Mexican American community in profound ways while hardening opinions regarding their relationship with law enforcement.

The Inquest

The anger and confusion over Salazar’s death and the wider law enforcement response to the march immediately resulted in demands for a public inquest. The inquest involved sixty-one witnesses and the examination of over 200 pieces of evidence. Sixteen days of testimony produced over 2,000 pages of testimony.

Before and during the inquest, Los Angeles law enforcement and political leadership attempted to control the narrative. They described the Mexican American community in unfavourable terms, suggesting they were easily influenced by outsiders and vulnerable to communism. They pointed the finger at Mexican Americans for the violence.

However, witnesses came forward who described the march as uneventful and peaceful until the Sheriff’s Department closed in on the crowd. Many stated the violence they saw only went in one direction and that law enforcement victimised the most vulnerable members of the community.

Historian Edward J. Escobar has since noted that Los Angeles law enforcement regularly deployed agent provocateurs in social movements, including the Chicano movement. A 1978 class action suit against the LAPD revealed “that LAPD officers had infiltrated several Chicano groups, including the Chicano student organisation at California State, and had enrolled in Chicano studies courses there to monitor faculty members’ lectures.”

The Verdict

The inquest ended with a 4–3 decision declaring that Salazar had died at “the hands of another”. This is a generic phase that is used when someone dies but no one is apportioned blame.

Despite the split decision, the jury was in internal agreement, with all seven jurors expressing their view to the Los Angeles Times that they believed law enforcement to be at fault. They stated law enforcement had acted recklessly and dangerously.

However, the 4–3 decision did little to assuage the Mexican American community’s anger, as a unanimous decision might have compelled the district attorney to act. The results were then seemingly buried as the Los Angeles Police Department had a bigger case to try: that of Charles Manson.

Despite disappointment in its eventual conclusion, the inquest did produce an explanation for what had happened that August afternoon in 1970 and how Salazar died, even if the actions of the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department remained questionable.

The Legacy and Aftermath

The deaths and violence had a profound effect on the Chicano movement, as any further demonstrations followed a similar pattern of confrontation and violence between protesters and law enforcement.

The event reinforced the community’s experience of oppression. As one participant noted, “Just as everybody in the barrio has somebody in the war, just about everybody here has been harassed by the police or knows someone in prison.”

Three people lost their lives during the march, and one of those was a rising voice for Mexican Americans. By killing Salazar, the movement lost a burgeoning media star who could have helped the movement tell its story, but he was silenced by law enforcement.

He and the Chicano movement would not be the last to receive this treatment.

Look out Monday for an in-depth look into the career and life of Ruben Salazar here on Murder Mayhem UK for paid subscribers!

Until next Wednesday: Stay safe, stay curious.