On March 18, The New York Times released an investigation detailing sexual harassment, assault and grooming young women faced from Cesario Estrada “Cesar” Chávez, the labor and political activist who founded the United Farm Workers (UFW) in the 1960s. Chávez used his platform for non-violent protests and boycotts for labor equality. A man who was once considered a peacemaker now faces severe accusations. The statues and streets named after Chávez are being taken down and re-named, seemingly attempting to erase his impact across the country.
Chávez’s monuments were removed days after the investigation report was released, and the speed of the response faced mixed opinions, prompting questions of whether or not Chávez’s misdemeanors diminish the impact he made. Similar questions prevail among many public figures seen over time, from painter Pablo Picasso and former president Richad Nixon. All these examples included figures who made an impact, but also committed their own atrocities.
A statue is meant to be a piece of public learning, but when the statue represents someone who has chosen to commit acts to hurt others, it makes sense as to why they are being taken down. Regardless of how long-lasting and empowering an individual’s work is, their character serves as a testament to who they are and their true intentions. One’s actions stay relevant past their legacy and should stay present to hold them accountable. As a result, it does not matter what good the person did if they also committed violent and despicable acts. Even if their service is celebrated independently from who they are as a person, it still does not replace their actions which caused long-term effects.
One’s legacy cannot erase or hide their actions, as their actions contribute to their legacy. The foundation of Chávez’s movements was to serve people and fight for justice. While this was achieved to a certain extent, people still suffered at the hand of his leadership. Chávez worked with many laborers to lead through his protests, one being Ana Murguia, who was just 13 years old when she began to suffer years of alleged sexual assault from Chávez at the beginning of his reforms. Chávez’s ideologies are rooted in hypocrisy: in the public eye, he fought for fairness and for the underrepresented. In the private eye, he abused power to take advantage of followers. Despite the celebrations of his cause, to not acknowledge his actions outside his work is a disservice, as it continues to silence those oppressed. From the 1960s to the 1970s, two out of every three sexual assaults were not reported to law enforcement because of a lack of victim support. The then “taboo” of sexual assault, when Chávez was most active, was a driving contributor to victim silence, something Chávez saw and took advantage of.
However, some would argue that Chávez’s success in social justice and reform was large enough to separate his alleged crimes because his reforms helped more people than the number of victims hurt. After all, Chávez’s work with the UFW helped millions of agricultural workers, now working in safer conditions with better wages and contracts. The United States is home to nearly three million agricultural workers today, and because of Chávez’s leading reforms, they now work under fairer conditions and wages.
These improvements do not reverse the harm he caused to others, and if Chávez shall carry out a legacy, it should also include his own humanity. There is no evidence of Chávez trying to take accountability for his alleged crimes against his followers; in fact, there is only evidence of him trying to cover up his actions and silence victims.
Oxford Languages describes a legacy as “the long-lasting impact of particular events, actions, etc. that took place in the past, or of a person’s life.” While Chávez was there to help those in need, he was also willing to take advantage of those same people in unspeakable ways. So, as more victims come forward and more monuments are ripped down, it fuels the understandable resentment towards Chávez. To encapsulate the situation honestly, moving forward, Chávez should be acknowledged for both his work and crimes. While his work and protest has benefited the many that work in agriculture, he is not someone to be admired while being taught about. All of his actions should be taught, including the assaults, so there is an understanding of how he used his power in total.
