Tag Archives: LAST

Week:13

Leave a reply

For my final course for this course ( although I know I am posting this a bit late), first I want to talk about the documents in Dawson’s text and then talk about the course as a whole.

One thing I noticed comparing the two documents, document 11.1, the summary of Judgment & Order of Superior Court of Nueva Loja, seemed to be more structured and organized than the opinion by judge Kaplan. This may be because one is a summery of another text and the other is an excerpt from the original text but I found this really fascinating especially since both parties state at one portrays the Ecuadorian judicial system as corrupt and unfit to reach a fair verdict. Also, compared to the court in New York, I had the impression that the Ecuadorian court had a more objective perspective, denying quite a few of the plaintiff’s claims. This again seems to be trying to imply that the judicial system of Ecuador is not as biased as it is said to be and possibly even fairer than the court in New York. This case reminded me of Erin Brockovich and the case she fought against PG&E. Maybe it’s b\just because both involve suing a powerful American company for polluting the environment. ( the movie is excellent so it’s worth watching if you’re interested.)

I’ve always had a strong interest in Latin America. I especially loved Mexican culture and it was the reason why I studied Spanish for three years. Yet at the beginning of the course, I had absolutely no knowledge of Latin American history, politics, or racial diversity, and when asked to chose 3 words to describe Latin America, I said something like passionate and colorful. Although I still think Latin Americans are more passionate in general, now I realize that these words were only scratching the surface. The complex history of the region makes describing it with only a few words extremely difficult. As professor Jon has mentioned a couple of times the more I learn about Latin America the more difficult it becomes to describe. Every week we could see a new dimension of the region which is also somehow interconnected by the history of colonialism and racism. However, I think this is what makes Latin America so captivating. The pandemic as well as the ever-changing political situation, such as chilians decision to rewrite the constitution, makes it very difficult to predict what lies ahead for the content, just as Creelman was unable to predict the Mexican revolution. I wonder if we were to accurately predict the future would that change anything? Or would we end up with the same results anyway?

This course was very eye-opening and made me ponder concepts or ideas I had never thought of before living in Japan and I’m really glad I took it this semester. Thanks everyone:)

Caudillismo: Identity Landmark of Hispanic American Authoritarian Political Culture

Leave a reply

The second source is by Alina Titei, Caudillismo: Identity Landmark of Hispanic American Authoritarian Political Culture. Titei presents three arguments made by scholars, including William H. Beezley mentioned previously, to explain the origins of caudillismo, “the Spanish monarchy, the colonial period, and the independence wars” (Titei. 286). Charles E. Chapman offers the first argument that the Spanish monarchy is the root of caudillismo, stating that similarities can be found in the attitudes of the conquistadors. Richard M. Morse, on the contrary, believes that the two Catholic monarchs Isabela and Ferdinand and their two distinct ideologies, “medieval and Renaissance, Thomistic and Machiavellian.” (qtd. in Titei. 287). He connects the birth of caudillos amid the chaos in Latina America with the emergence of condittieri’s in 15th century Italy. The second interpretation by William H. Beezley is as discussed in the first source. The third argument, considers caudillos a as the products of the war for independence, which created the perfect ground work for them to gain power. John Lynch, a supporter of this perspective caudillismo is one of the unique factors which forms the characteristics of Latin America and something that is “not by all means a natural descendant of the Spanish legacy”. The independence wars paved the way for clientelism, which was an advantage for caudillos with a unique position as a strong military leader. They were also the only ones who could manage the ethnic groups demanding for freedom. Tetai also presents a religious patron-client relationship, such as a child and a godfather, which are unique to Latin America. This text offers different ways of interpreting the emergence of caudillismo other than that of Beezley’s. By using this information, we will be able to demonstrate a multidimensional approach to the origins of caudillos and clientelism. However, although the three perspectives mentioned in the article seems to be most popular among scholars, it is important to note that other factors such as the Unitarian’s attitude towards the rural folk could have played a role in the emergence of caudillismo. This text also demonstrates characteristics of caudillismo specific to Hispano America. Through reading and writing about this document, I have become very interested in what makes Latin American Caudillismo unique. Comparing Latin American caudillos with other leaders considered to be caudillos in other parts of the world, such as Spain, is something I am planning to research further to present in the final video project.

Sources;

Titei, A., & Alina Titei. (07/01/2013). Caudillismo: Identity landmark of hispanic american authoritarian political culture University Press.

Caudillismo: An Interpretive Note

Leave a reply

The first source is Caudillismo: an Interpretive Note by William H. Beezley, included in the Journal of Inter-American Studies. In the section, he first discusses the Spanish Empire’s system of rule by “theory and practice”. This created room for a relatively flexible government in the colonies which gave immense power to a single person governing the region. Thus, the colonial period “contributed to the centralistic rule, undivided authority, intense mental system that left the gap between theory and practice to be manipulated at the discretion of officials in the enforced legal restrictions” (Beezley. 346). However, independence from Spain, meaning the absence of a king to be loyal to, resulted in a divided nation. Charismatic Caudillos who could captivate the loyalty of the people were perfect figures to unite the divided communities. It was also essential that these individuals had control over the military, and ties to other branches of the government as well. Caudillos had four elements of society, the clergy, the military the haciendas, and political groups, which they could side with to secure their positions and attract further popularity. Since none of these four elements had enough power to take control of the government on their own, they were used by caudillos as popularity boosters depending on their usefulness at a certain moment. Beezley also argues that the successful rule of the Caudillos established a sense of nationalism in the region. Even in areas with strong regional autonomy, the national caudillo would command his regional counterparts which would result in establishing the notion of a national community in the people. Additionally, Beezley draws comparisons between successful and unsuccessful caudillos. Ones which rule successfully create enforced social and political stability while unsuccessful ones do the exact opposite, deepening the divisions between local communities.  By including the information from the text, the video will be able to show how the colonial period had an effect on the establishment of caudillismo, as well as the impacts a successful caudillo and an unsuccessful caudillo has on the region. However, the article does not mention the factors which makes a certain individual rule successfully. Comparing the regimes of well-known national caudillos, such as Antonio López de Santa Anna and Rosas, with lesser known ones would provide a better understanding of what determined caudillo’s success. Also, the text only provides one way of analyzing the causation factors of caudillos which can be avoided by including writings of other scholars.

Sources:

Beezley, W. (1969). Caudillismo: An Interpretive Note. Journal of Inter-American Studies, 11(3), 345-352. doi:10.2307/165417

Week11: The Terror

1 Reply

This week’s material was personally very hard to digest. I am blessed that I’ve never experienced atrocities such as war, genocide, or any kind of life-threatening situation in my lifetime. Imagining the scene of the events written in the text or shown in the videos is horrifying enough, the horror and anxiety the Latin American people might have felt are inconceivable. Before diving into a specific text, I wanted to mention something Professor John talked about in his Lecture video which kind of related to my previous statement. “This week, I have no questions, as they would suggest that you (or I, or anyone) could provide answers that would be anything but glib. Or rather, all we have are questions, as we reach the limits of any explanation or narrative”. The documents we read and see can only capture a small fragment of actual reality. Of course this can be said for all the materials we have been looking at up to now, but I think this is especially evident in this week’s topic.

The writing I want to focus on this week is that of Carolina Huamán Oyague, document 9.4 in Dwson’s text. Although the other texts were equally interesting, I was drawn to this particular document because of the strong sentiments that seeped through the words. Her strong emotions aginst Fujimori is clearly shown in her words like “His mocking smile”, “ill-fated attitude”, “self-involved and blinded by the pure ambition for power and money”. Carolina also points out the contradiction in Fujimori’s statements in court, saying that he”plays dumb” at first but then mentioning that he was at the center of everything. The section earlier on in the text in which a circus and clowns are used as a metaphor to describe how FUjimori is no longer able to deceive the people was especially interesting. Why did she decide to use the circus to make her point? And why clowns instead of others like magicians who would also probably fit what she is trying to describe? On a different note, Carolina discrbes situations in very visual ways. Some examples being, “but they never heard our cries, much less stopped to see our tears”, “the delivery my sister’s remains in a cardboard box” and “I wish tears did not run down my cheeks”. This helps ster up stronger emotions in the reader which would make them side with Carolina. I am in no way saying what the Fujimori regime had done in Peru can be justified. However, I think it’s crucial we read this text with a grain of salt, since the author is extremely biased. The document can give us a peek of the perspective of the victims of violence in the era but doesn’t quite allow us to see what was actually said in these trials. As professor Joh said in his video “there is a limit to what such narratives can tell. And doubt came to haunt some of these stories, above all Menchú’s. It is not clear, for instance, that her brother was killed quite as she says he was. So even testimonio fails to give us access to the brutality of the terror”.

 

Week10: Power to the People

5 Replies

This week’s reading and lecture showed how appliances, such as the microphone and the radio, played a significant role in forming the politics in Latin America. Politicians were able to reach larger audiences more efficiently and civilians were able to view political leaders as closer figures. Out of the four texts Dawson presents of Eva Perón’s renunciamiento, I will focus on Document 7.3, Evita’s speech including the interaction with the crowd.

The first point I noticed while reading the text is how often she uses the phrases, moral and spiritual.  She also says “the Argentine nation is comprised of honorable men and
women”(Dawson. 232) and “Argentine people have a big heart” (Dawson. 232), referring to the personality traits of the nation in general. Eva goes out of her way to appeal to both the rational side and the emotional side of the listeners. Her repeated use of these two words clearly represents the populist stances of the Peróns. The next thing I would like to mention is the way Evita describes herself in her speech. She portrays herself as a weak, fragile, and humble Argentine woman who would sacrifice everything for her people, the descamisados. She uses the adjective “humble” to refer to her own character and actions 7 times throughout the text. Being a humble woman was probably an important factor to give a sense of closeness to the people instead of someone above the clouds. Her description of herself was a bit puzzling to me since the video clip of her in Professor Jon’s lecture seemed to suggest quite the opposite. Evita had a relatively low, clear, and strong voice which gave me the impression of a sturdy woman. She also attributes all her achievements, actions, and belongings to General Perón which establishes her reputation as a supportive, devoted wife as well as reaffirms her frail character. Lastly, and most importantly, the interactions between the crowd and Evita concerning the matter of her running as VP, represents the theme of this week, power to the people. The crowd of descamisados had the power to get their demands through in a way previous populations did not. This clearly shows how the power dynamic shifted in these regions.

discussion questions:

  1. Why do you think Evita used the adjective “humble” in particular to describe herself?
  2. Do you think Evita would have been able to refuse to run as VP if it were in a public setting instead of the radio?
  3. Do you think how a politician represented themselves through the media was more closely related to their popularity rather than the policies they stood for?

Week 5: Caudillos v.s. the Nation State

4 Replies

This week I would like to focus on writing about my thoughts on The SlaughterHouse and what it represented.

Although I found the story interesting, it seemed to highlight the reason why the Unitarians could not gain much support from the rural people. One example is how Echeverria portrays black women in a very inhumane way, associating them with harpies and viragos. This really shows how the creoles elite favored the social hierarchy constructed by the Colonists. On the other hand, Caudillos seemed to treat all races and classes equally as long as one remained loyal to them and they themselves came from various positions in society. Why would a person in the lower class support an ideal upheld by the people who desired to keep the cast system which oppressed them for so many years instead of a person who represented equal opportunity? Trying to achieve ideals created by Europeans which the colonies worked tremendously hard to expose of may be another factor adding to the sense of resistance against Unitarianism.

The tyrannical and authoritarian ways of Caudillos are undoubtedly immoral and unsustainable. However, even with this in mind, reading The Slaughterhouse didn’t exactly make me want to align myself with Unitarians.  In fact, it actually made me disappointed. The use of sarcasm throughout the text only painted an image of a high class, educated elite sitting on his high horse and mocking uneducated, poor folk. I have only read one text form one individual and therefore dismissing all Unitarians at the time as snobs would be misleading but that was the impression I got from the story. Just as Dawson had said in his text the elite class had “little little sympathy for the sensibilities and capacities of the rural folk who formed the backbone of the Rosas regime”(Dawson, 59).

Some interesting information I found while researching about the story is that apparently the actual manuscript has not yet been found. The publisher , Juan María Gutiérrez, has also mentioned in his editorial notes that Echeverría had no intention of publishing the text and it was more of a rough outline for a poem he was trying to write. It is speculated that Gutiérrez was the one who actually composed the outline into well polished literature which I found very fascinating since El matadero seems to be credited completely to Echeverria as one of his best works. This is some info I found on the interweb and also I can only understand 30% of  the paper written by Emilio Carilla in Spanish, so I am not quite sure how credible the soureses but I thought it was something worth mentioning.

Some discussin question I have for this week are;

  • if the story was actually co-authored by Gutiérrez, is the choice of words to describe races Echeverría’s or Gutiérrez’s?
  • What kind of effect would have El matadero had if it was published at the time it was written?
  • Who was Echeverria’s target audience?

I’d love to hear you thoughts and bye till next week!

Week4: Independence Narrative, Past and Present

2 Replies

This week’s lecture video offered ideas and viewpoints I couldn’t see by reading the text on my own and found it very enlightening.  Also, Mr.Alexander Dawson’s text gave me a better understanding of the reason behind our inability to determine when Latin America came to exist or came to be its own. In this week’s post, I want to write about some thoughts I had while reading the three texts by the three individuals, Bolivar, Martí and Chévez.

One statement by Bolívar which I found fascinating was America was denied not only its freedom but even an active and effective tyranny¨(Alexander, Dawson. 23). He points out how the local people of South America, mainly the Creoles, could not participate in politics which kept them inexperienced and uneducated of the ways to govern a state. The main reason Spain probably appointed Spaniards to positions of power because they wanted to ensure people in the office were loyal to their mother country. However, I wonder if they intended the result which Bolívar points out. By keeping the local people out of politics, as mentioned before, they would, according to Bolivar,  be incapable of ruling a nation. If the colonizers could brainwash their colonies into believing they themselves cannot govern their country, it may prevent uprisings. Also, even if a revolution was to occur since the new local leaders have no knowledge of politics, their new system would collapse soon after and the people have no choice but to go back to their colonizers. I think the Spanish may have had this result in mind when creating a political system that excludes the people in the colonies although their aim, if it was intended, was unsuccessful.

Martí’s Our America was interesting yet a bit confusing to read because of all the metaphors and allegories. The passage where he mentions ¨The haughty man¨ is clearly criticizing Bolivar’s ideals and his doubt of the Latin American’s ability to self govern. I am curious to know who the metaphor regarding Washington is referring to.  At first, I thought Martí maybe pointing a finger at Bolivar for trying to escape to Europe right before his death. However, since his exile was due to internal conflicts and not foreign interference this is probably not the case. He could be trying to confront people who sided with Spain in general. I couldn´t quite pinpoint Martí’s intention behind this metaphor so it would be interesting to hear other people’s thoughts.

For Chavéz’s speach, I could tell he was an incredibly carismatic individual just by reading the text. His harsh words for discribing the North as a villain and an enemy probably sturred up strong emotions in the people which he used as a tool for change.

Here are a couple of questions which I’m curious to know other peoples opininons:

  1.  Did Spain intentianlly keep the people of Latin America in ” permanent infancy with
    regard to public affairs” as Bolivar puts it?
  2. In their text, Bolívar uses the pronoun “she/her” to describe Spain and Martí uses “she/her” for Latin America and “he/him” for foreign nations. Is there a reason behind these choices of pronouns?
  3. Who is Martí’s Washington metaphor referring to?

 

 

 

Week3: The Colonial Experience

2 Replies

I always assumed, in Latin America, the population consisted of indigenous people and Europeans and the two lived completely segregated from each other. Therefore, I was very surprised to learn more African slaves were brought into South American colonies then into the United States. The fact that interracial marriages were fairly common was even more shocking. I expected races to be completely separated as they were in North America, especially because ethnic cleansing was taking place back in Spain. However, considering the fact Latin America was a “racial hotbed” as it was said in the lecture, the mixing of races was probably inevitable.

As a biracial person myself, I think the idea of trying to comprehend and manage differences can be still applied today, just as the Casta Paintings tried to do so. In Japan, I have always been told I do not look Japanese and some people assumed I could not speak Japanese. Although this made me feel uncomfortable at first I got the same comment so many times that it stopped bothering me. However, recently, a person I met through social media who also happens to go to UBC, told me I look completely Japanese and did not look caucasian at all. This person’s comment upset me and at the time I did not know why. Now when I think about it, the reason I felt upset was probably because I felt as though the identity I built myself, the white looking biracial girl, was being challenged. Being told I was one thing all my life and suddenly being told differently confused me. I didn’t know what category I fit into. I can only imagine how confusing and unsettling people in the colonial era must have felt, especially for your race defines your social status.

The story of Catalina de Erauso was also very fascinating. Joan of Arc is another figure who dressed as a man to fight in battle but her sexuality or gender identity is not clear, which makes Catalina stand out even more. Her memoir made me wonder whether she was the only transgender conquistador. Had there been other women who dressed in armor to fight against the Indios? Also, were there women fighting against the Spaniards on the indigenous side? Taking into account women’s social status at the time, female warriors would have been rare, however, I think it would be an interesting topic to learn about.