The first thing I noticed while watching the Dawson video, was the amount of occasions he used the word ‘ethos.’ I like this word. Ethos is a Greek term that defines the characteristics of a group, and in this case is being used to characterize Mexico modernity. Before watching this video, I struggled with the term ‘modernity’ because I had never really heard it been used much, in my academic studies or in my everyday life. Modernity isn’t a term used on the daily, and I so struggled to remember to think of a time where a teacher of mine used it outside of history class. Because of this, I focussed on this chapter in it’s historical terms, rather than a social backdrop in which I usually examine these readings.
What struck me when I turned my attention to the reading was the line that mentioned, “people of African and indigenous origins were most often the victims of Latin American modernization.”
The people of African origins were mostly slaves, which in any historical context, never would have had a say in the way things were to supposed to go through anyways. This can be argued however, if we take a look at Hegel’s “master and slave,” in literal terms, one can argue that Latin American modernization did have influence from the slaves. working with natural resource extraction, Latin American economies could only export to what the slave could provide the states/colonies. The resource extraction and selling of goods, had impacted modernization, and that was done at the hands of the slaves.
Throughout any historical timeline, it seems that indigenous people’s often get left out of the conversation. They partake in their own practices, beliefs and religious exercises, and often seen as ‘voodoo’ to the white man. It has been systemic genocide over indigenous peoples in many era’s and geographical aspects of time, that it should not be surprising that things were not different. The Industrial Revolution might be the biggest demise to indigenous peoples and contact with giant political figures because of the role that religion played during the revolt.
By being able to mass produce such commodities like a Bible, religious figures with a lot of political influence, were able to thrust their ‘right’ onto others ‘wrong’ and take hold of the moment. Religion has it’s social affect on politics, while resources have it’s physical affect on politics, and the everyday culture, or…wait…ETHOS of the group seems to get lost.
Question: What aspect of society should have the greatest influence when constructing independence: religion, economics, or ethos?