‘Not All Skinfolk are Kinfolk!’: Latine ICE and Proximity to Whiteness

Malcolm X introduced the concept of the house “negro” and the field “negro ” to white America. During slavocracy, the house “negro” would aid and protect the master’s interests, even to the detriment of those who lived in shacks and did the backbreaking fieldwork. Despite how horrific enslavement was for all with Black skin, the house “negro,” in contrast to the field “negro,” enjoyed minor advantages that they did not want to jeopardize.

Proximity to whiteness has its privileges.

When the air was thick with resistance and rebellion, house “negros” were tempted to warn their enslavers. Consider the roughly 250 revolts against slavery, many foiled by house “negros” whispering warnings into masters’ ears. Examples include the 1739 Stono Rebellion in South Carolina, the 1741 slave insurrection in New York, and the 1800 Gabriel Rebellion in Virginia.

Loose lips thwarted large-scale, well-organized uprisings. Field “negros” seeking liberation would end up executed because of the house “negros.”

As the African American proverb popularized by Zora Neale Hurston reminds us: “Not all skinfolk are kinfolk!” But why? Why would kinfolk betray skinfolk? Seeking understanding is difficult, if not impossible. 

Simplistic binary explanations of “resister” vs. “collaborator” fall short. Motivation varies, driven by a sundry mix of similar and diverse forces: fear, coercion, duress, loyalty, opportunism and seeing oneself through the eyes of one’s oppressor.

During the Indian Wars (c. 1860s–c. 1890s), Meenahtseeus, also known as “White Swan” (c. 1850–1904), served in George Armstrong Custer’s 7th Cavalry Regiment as a Crow scout during the 1876 campaign against the Northern Cheyenne and Sioux. Some scouts participated in the genocide of their own people. At times, they aided operations against rival tribal nations; at other times, they participated in the slaughter of their own people.

“Not all skinfolk are kinfolk!”

Again, simplistic dualistic labeling of “resister” vs. “collaborator” fails to capture the complexity of motivation within the context of settler colonial violence. Like the house “negro,” their motivations are difficult to discern. They ranged from tribal rivalries, as was the case with White Swan, to survival strategies within an expanding U.S. hegemony. They also included coercion, loss of tribal autonomy, promises of food and protection from white settler colonialists.

At the Sobibór extermination camp in Poland, there was a Jewish kapo nicknamed “Berliner” who was a bit too enthusiastic in supporting Nazi ideology. A prisoner himself, he was given authority over other Jewish prisoners. While many kapos were coerced into these roles, Berliner was infamous, according to surviving fellow prisoners, for the sadistic level of violence and brutality he employed.

“Not all skinfolk are kinfolk!”

While we do not know his identity, it is believed “Berliner” perished during the October 14, 1943, uprising, when many kapos were slain as retribution by those revolting.

While the dichotomy between “resister” and “collaborator” remains too simplistic, in this case, Berliner relished being a collaborator. And while it is impossible to ascertain his motives, one must wonder if he suffered from the same ailment afflicting many on the margins—hating their identity while lusting for the identity of their oppressor.

Recent Examples

This leads us to one last vignette. Recently, someone recorded an ICE agent with a heavy Latine accent stopping a U.S. citizen of Latine origin and asking where they were born. When the U.S. citizen asked why they were being interrogated, the heavily accented Latine ICE agent responded that the citizen’s accent was probable cause that they were an “illegal.”

This Latine-arrepentido is patrolling streets in search of Latines to persecute during this moment when white supremacy is on the upsurge. This ICE agent with a heavy Latine accent is but one of many.

When I was detained by Border Patrol in the Sonoran Desert for following Jesús’ command to feed the hungry, provide water to the thirsty, care for the infirm, and welcome the immigrant (Mt. 25:31–46), I was detained by Latine agents for practicing my faith.

“Not all skinfolk are kinfolk!”

Why would brown folk put on white faces and brown shirts to persecute other brown folk? Like their kapo, scout, and house “negro” predecessors, it is difficult to determine their motivations. Maybe they are ashamed of the skin color of the mother who birthed them, willing to trade familia for acceptance by those who call them sp*cs behind their backs. Maybe the hatred of having an accent is taken out on others who also have accents.

Or maybe, just maybe, it’s the $50,000 signing bonus for new ICE recruits, along with student loan forgiveness. Maybe, for so many of our people who live in poverty, becoming white supremacist storm troopers is seen as an opportunity to escape the structural poverty constructed for those relegated to the underside of vanilla society.

If this is the case, then I wonder: What does it profit un traidor a su pueblo—to gain the whole world but lose their soul in the process (Mark 8:36)?