Towards an uncertain future

Chapter 11- Towards an uncertain future

Chapter 11 gave a good worldly context to what we've been learning about this term. Something that really stood out to me was this idea of a "crisis generation," and how the predominant unemployment crisis in North America is something that Latin America experienced a generation ago. Dawson
calls Latin America, "ahead of the curve" in this respect, and relates multinational corporation's power to colonial powers of the past.
I think it's this sense of unclear, global agendas run by inhuman and abstract forces that cause crises such as these. These forces can be seen on a personal level as well, through protest, through corruption of government agencies. Overall huge powers such as these foster poor social interactions, and the obliteration of the natural world for the sake of greed.
It's appropriate that Dawson concludes with document 11.1, an account of Neuva Loja, Aguinda v. Chevron Texaco because one of the biggest issues that our world faces as it globalizes is how to organize the use of natural resources in a healthy way. It's amazing how power can tweak rules and regulations in order to manipulate their own self interests. It disgusts me that Texaco could get away with dumping around 16 billion gallons of "production water" into surface waters over a span of only 18 years. I grew up going to oil spill sites on occasion with my Dad because he works as a toxicologist on site for oil spills internationally. The reality of oil spills and misconduct is ugly, and it has a long lasting impact on a region both environmentally and culturally.
It is true that Latin America, along with the rest of the world is heading "towards an uncertain future," I guess that the question now is how do we end the corruption and misuse of power when it is on such a large scale, and how can we create better social interactions within Latin America and globally.

Research Assignment

Research Assignment- Caudillo versus the Nation State

Source 1: Juan Manuel de Rosas: Authoritarian Caudillo and Primitive Populist by Jeffrey M. Shumway

In Juan Manuel de Rosas: Authoritarian Caudillo and Primitive Populist, Jeffrey M. Shumway, explores the two opposing factors that maintained the power of Juan Manuel de Rosas’s rule: violent control and cultural association. Rosas’s number one goal was to restore order and stability to Argentina, which he saw as a state of anarchy due to the Unitarians.

On the violent side of his rule, to gain authoritative control Rosas did not tolerate any form of opposition. Those who spoke against his will were tracked down by assassins and brutally murdered. The most common form of violent murder that took place was the butcher-like slitting of throats, inspiration for Echeverria’s metaphor of “The Slaughterhouse.” Other torturous killings included “waistcoating,” which Shumway describes as sewing up the victim in a rawhide and leaving them out on the plains to die. It is hard to believe that someone who induced so much hatred and terror could remain in power, however Rosas’s tactics to gain a following created just as strong feelings of love and loyalty.

Shumway explains how, in this light, Rosas gained cultural associations through conforming himself to the lifestyles and interests of different sub groups.

Rosas believed that the key to maintaining order was to control the lower class, and allow them some form of voice. He understood this to be because in times of civil unrest the rich and powerful are inherently blamed by those who have less. In order to avoid this disdain he appropriated himself to the lifestyles and interests of groups such as the Afro-Argentinos, the rural population, and the Indigenous communities. Rosas reached out and communicated to these groups, offering them jobs and benefits within his law.

He strongly identified with the rural population because of his wealthy rancher status, and adopted gaucho dress and habits. For instance he would subject himself to his own punishments such as getting lashes for forgetting to bring his lasso to the fields. Gauchos, who placed a strong moral emphasis on equality and dignity, empathized with this. Rosas would even dine and converse with the gaucho men as well as indigenous communities. He spoke some of the indigenous languages, and formed personal relationships with some of the chiefs.

Shumway concludes his article with a very interesting modern debate over whether or not to rename part of Sarmiento street in Buenos Aires after Juan Manuel de Rosas. This surfaces the important debate of whether or not Rosas, along with other caudillos, should be recognized for any good that they did despite their violent tactics.

It seems there still exists a large divide between calling Rosas a “tyrant” or “hero.” A more modern, diplomatic school of thought called La nueva escuela histórica paints caudillos as neither black nor white, but as complex figures. It is interesting when retelling history what is told and what is left out, because if caudillos were only recounted by their followers, or only recounted by their opposition, they would not even seem possibly embodied in the same figure.

Source 2: Making Sense of Caudillos and “Revolutions” in Nineteenth century Latin America by John Charles Chasteen

Making Sense of Caudillos and “Revolutions in Nineteenth century Latin America by John Charles Chasteen was a good general look at Caudillos, and how the term can have different implications depending on the location and time period. Chasteen defines caudillo as: “a man with a personal following largely independent of any institutional leadership role.” Caudillos were mostly military men, but they varied in background status. For example, Juan Manuel de Rosas of Argentina was a powerful, wealthy landowner before his political rise, whereas Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna of Mexico gained his fortune and status after his political rise.

Caudillos formed a tiered society in which they existed at the top. Directly beneath them were their powerful supporters, then the followers of these powerful supporters, and then the working class. It doesn’t seem that race was necessarily a determinant of where individuals rested on the tier because caudillos varied in ethnic background. Central America was dominated by a liberal white Creole caudillo, and conservative mestizo caudillo. In Venezuela Jose Antonio Paez shared African descent. Chasteen explains the main overarching factor was that they were individuals who “had a talent for gaining other people’s confidence and loyalty.” It was a time dominated by patronage, or competition of social networks.

The “revolutions” that occurred during the nineteenth century were a matter of physical, often violent involvements of what was considered political participation. I found it interesting that not many of these revolutions instilled social change or progression, but instead was part of a cycle of elites abusing power, and being taken over by those who aspire to take their place. How a caudillo displayed and proved himself during a revolution was key in whether or not he would win over the affection of the people. He must parade himself through the cities and countryside gaining a following, and in battle he must fight with a commanding physical presence. His resulting fate was typically either to be forced into exile, or to be put into office. If a caudillo gained office, he would start by providing benefits that would trickle down the social tier that he had created. Powerful supporters would directly gain some of the wealth of office, and then in turn pass wealth down to their followers, who would pass it on to their own etc.

Chasteen explains that this form of revolution was a constant threat, a political cycle that was so predominant it formed the political process. Brazil is one exception to this general rule because of the size and diversity had less political revolutions and violence. With less incentive and a lack of firearms, the death tolls in Brazil were much lower.

The rest of the article was a series of documents, most of them autobiographical writings of caudillos themselves from different countries. One thing that surprised me was that caudillos tended to express emotional sensitivity as well as tendency towards self-sacrifice. I think this is what made them more likable, relatable characters to many.

Chapter 10 Speaking Truth to Power


In a time of so much corruption for the sake of power, it was really incredible to read the true strength and real power through the words of those who fought against unjust treatment as citizens of Mexico. Video 10.1 of the Madres de la Plaza de Mayo demanding information about their children was heart-shaking. I don't speak Spanish, but I could still hear what they had to say by the chilling passion in their voices. People not previously involved in politics were pushed to the edge by the cruel and terrifying events happening to their neighbors and loved ones.
The government dealt with uprisings like this in the most backhanded way, forming false opinions and painting groups such as the Madres as "crazy".
It's interesting how much documentation played a role in the search for truth/justice. The contrast between Figure 10.5 and Figure 10.6 really illustrates how deeply the misrepresentation ran.
An image of the fallen victim with and without a gun has such different implications. The man turns from an innocent victim, to a threat or danger.
The government was covering up its dirty work, skewing the truth of events to the public. The reality was finally revealed when the video by Fernando Rocha was released, and the sheer brutality of the massacre was seen. I guess the best way to backfire against biased media like this is to show evidence otherwise. It makes me upset how manipulative people are of the media (then as well as today). Photography/News Articles/Video are the most direct way to transmit mass messages and a lot of the time these messages are inaccurate, and biased.
It is interesting to read the back story on how/when/why the kidnappings and violence have occurred. Growing up in California and Arizona, I was always encouraged not to visit Mexico because "I'd be kidnapped" or hear "true stories" about people's relatives who left on vacation and never came back. I feel like a lot of this, despite the real danger, is negative stereotypes that exist near the border.

9-The Bloodbath


The Peruvian conflict was one with an intriguing, terrifying violence that horrified all, and was justified by only some people's points of view. Coping and trying to make sense of violence, with a hint of romanticism, many began to write about the dualism that existed between good and evil in a period of unorganized terror. Along with personal accounts, leaders began to speak of reform in a time when people were looking for an end to such violence.
In "The Interview of the Century," an interview of Chairman Gonzalo, he spoke of the "need for revolutionary violence," and that he believes is a universal law with no exception. This made me wonder, is dramatic revolution possible without some form of "awe factor" to get people reacting? And does this movement have to necessarily be violence or could it be something of a more positive, constructive nature?
"A Day in the Trial of the Century" was a very personal and emotional account. Huaman Oyague says something very beautiful and wise that "Real power is internal..." She is finally finding justice as Fujimori is brought to the courtroom. I liked the metaphor of Fujimori leading a circus of clowns, and the masks of these clowns being the cameras that cover people and events in corruption of his choosing. I think that she brings up a very vital contrast between the self-involved quest for power and money, and the persevering love and determination that she sees as reality. I think that this was the essence of what was good and evil in such a chaotic time.
Looking at the maps in the end of this chapter, I definitely agree that natural influences that may appear insignificant must have some kind of impact on human behavior in history. I don't think it's the main determinant of how humans in the area will interact, but in areas of high environmental stress and changes, it seems as though conflict is abundant. Peru for example is in an area of high mountains and low valleys, as well as a few different climate zones within the same relatively small area. I suppose this could cause for more isolated groups of people, making it more difficult to communicate. Also perhaps nations which form under varied land regions formulate different needs and goals. I was kind of confused by the last map's influence on human interaction, especially in Peru: how would having only untouched forest in the region impact the human interactions and conflict? Would people in this area having interest to gain power over these untouched forests be a cause of conflict? 

Power to the People-

The people really were given a louder voice and more tangible opinions when the radio came to be and people and ideas started to join together in large cities in result of urbanization.
It was interesting to look at the chart of how cities are growing at almost a linear rate, continuously increasing and expanding. The map especially shows how cities situate themselves around the coast leaving the interior lands vastly less populated.
On the map (figure D.4) it was staggering to see how people migrated in the masses from Mexico to the Southwestern United States.
Leaders seemed to value humbleness and connectedness to the people for the cause of this modernization. For example, Cardenas refused to move into the Presidential Palace as well as visited every state during his campaign. He distributed land in order to promote reform and growth.
The radio really played an important role in communicating larger ideas and movements to the citizens. It allowed for mass audiences and connections that couldn't previously exist. With this power however, came the selection of what is made public, and what is left out. Looking at the contrast between the first document and the second is a strong example of this. The first article, from The New York Times stated that, "The President's acceptance was unqualified." It goes on to explain that the Perons are there for the people, and want to do what the people want, yet never addresses how the audience responded to Peron and Evita.
The next article on the other hand was from the Evita's view, giving a recount of her speech. She addresses the President as "my dear descamisados of our Nation." She paints Peron as a heroic figure, guiding the nation out of a past of slavery into hope for a better future. She takes criticism gratefully such that it shields him from attacks, almost painting him as a god saying, "everything is Peron." Document 3 was an interesting account of the same speech to read because it included audience involvement. The audience was extremely supportive of Evita, shouting "With Evita! With Evita!" The battle she has between the audience is crucial to the story as they beg her to listen with their uproar and she tries to console them by stating that she would have taken the vice presidency if she found it to be a valid solution, but then finishes her speech with the core of what she stands for saying, "In the end, I will do as the people decide..."

Chapter 6:

I thought a major issue that this week's reading and film touched on was stereotypes in both a negative and positive sense. Both films seemed very propaganda-like. They displayed cooperation between the Americas as a whole: the first in fighting against disease, and second in agricultural production.
In the first film, "Silent War" I was surprised to see how the focus was on giving the vaccination to the locals. It painted the United State's involvement to seem heroic, and displayed the jungle as a death trap. I thought it was positive how the vaccine was coined the "genius of the Americas" though because it gave North and South America a combined success and it seems at least from this film that people had equal access. But then they finish the film by saying the real disease is fascism.
"Journey to Banana Land" was a fun film to watch. It was kind of over the top, and the whole thing (made by the United Fruit Company) turned into an advertisement for bananas, but I thought there was a lot of interesting, colorful footage. It made Latin America seem exotic and fascinating, but tried to make it relatable as the narrator would say, "just like our clothes" or "they go to church too," and tried to teach viewers a couple of Spanish words as well. It was interesting how it made the divide between the city people and the highland people. The highland people were described as "ancient" and by using "primitive" methods. It was interesting to jump straight from stereotypical Latin America to stereotypical United States America within the same film as we follow the journey of the banana. The ending showed a smiling, classic American family with Mom cooking bananas and healthy kids benefiting from the whole process.
Something that stuck with me from the last article by Dorfman and Mattelart was how Disney did not invent the inhabitants, but forced them into a "proper mold." I think that's a lot of what the United State's media did with outside cultures: tried to group them into one character so that they would be easier to display and target either negatively or positively.
In the first article I thought it was very powerful that Sandino finds pride in having emerged from an oppressed group, and he explores the bonds of nationality in a new sense, saying that one can destroy their rights to nationality when they become to greedy or selfish such as Adolfo Diaz or Emiliano Chamorro.

October 21st: Signs of Crisis in a Gilded Age (Ch 5)

The GDP growth chart (Figure C.1) was staggering. As a whole, Latin America's GDP grew exponentially between 1950 and 2000. One can only imagine how this dramatic change affected the social structure. The map in Figure C.6 really shows how diverse and rich the land of Latin America is, each area going through its own export growth and decline. I like how Dawson explains, "...one person's boom was always another's crisis" (141).
I found the poem by Dario very powerful because it speaks directly and approaches from the side of opposition. I liked the image of "a thousand cubs of Spanish lion," and how he addresses Roosevelt as "Hunter." It creates a very strong image, questioning Roosevelt's morality and position.
It is interesting how Ayala and Vasconcelos both respond to Mexico's situation with a list-like structure. Ayala's plan is really summed up in his some of his final words "...we are partisans of principles and not of men!" (158). He wants to end the Caudillo era, and asks people to join him with arms in order to defend Mexico's well being.
Vasconcelos takes a very interesting approach to the social stages of humanity in general, and specifically Mexico in the era of Eugenics. Step one is a time when power takes control and the focus is material, causing violence and competition. Two is a period of "faith in the formula" when people lock down on a system of laws and reason. Three is a period of beauty, joy, racial fusion, and limitless boundaries.
I thought a lot of what he had to say was very true and intriguing. The final stage, the "fantasy" seemed pretty unachievable though: when society can function on the instinct of beauty. I don't think there has ever existed a society that runs purely on love and aspiration, but I agree that it's something to work towards.