I find it interesting that when a society becomes more secular, it becomes more modern. I am a firm believer that church and state should always be separated. I agree with Dawson when he says that Mexico becoming more secular led to a more inclusive environment. The Catholic faith was not introduced to Mexico in a peaceful way. The fact that the Spanish conquistadores built a cathedral over top a pyramid in what is now El Zocalo, is symbolic of how the Catholic faith was introduced into Mexico. I believe that secularization was essential in Mexico advancing because it was a step in further separating itself from its colonial past. I was really intrigued when Dawson commented on how Latin American elite felt that the general population was incapable to have true democracy and liberty. I agree with Dawson that one of the reasons this idea of “incapability” to have democracy existed was because it stemmed from the fact that Latin American nations were composed of people of different races and racism was still very prevalent in Latin American societies. It also struck me how Dawson discussed that Mexico was looking for a modern façade and not necessarily focused on the values associated with modernity. When Dawson said this, I drew parallels to the present situation in Mexico. From what I’ve seen in Mexico, it seems that politicians are keener on building new plazas, and improving high-end areas rather than tackling the issues of corruption and poverty. They seem to give this illusion of modernity with building high-end shopping centres, and new highways, instead of investing in social programs that help in eradicating the pervasive sexism and racism that exists in Mexico.

I believe that the concept of having to have order before progress was definitely passed down from colonial times. This concept reminded me of the caudillo age. I believe that the idea that order must be imposed from the elite still continues in many Latin American countries. In my travels to Mexico, this is noticeable even in interactions between upper class Mexicans and lower class Mexicans. I have noticed upper class Mexicans speak to lower class Mexicans as if they needed to be directed in order to perform any task properly. Reading the chapter made me see Porfirio Diaz in a different light. Growing up, I have watched documentaries on Porfirio Diaz as well as heard about him from my family members. I always had a positive image of him and saw him as someone who helped construct Mexico’s economic boom. It never occurred to me that Diaz’s actions did not necessarily benefit all members of Mexican society. In class I would like to discuss people’s impressions of Porfirio Diaz. Should Diaz be considered a Mexican hero?