Tortilla discourse describes the time around the 1900s in Mexico, mainly about the national policies and the false belief in food choice. It is the period led by Porfiriato, who denigrated the consumption of maize and tortilla, instead, the wheat from Europe. It classified the races into 3 kinds: wheat corn and rice, and saying wheat consumption is supreme, involved the concept of ethnocentrism that believed the colonizer, the Western world is always correct.
The detail of the policy is ridiculous, one of them outlining that the daily required protein level is twice higher than today’s standard when the government finds out the national level of nutrition is insufficient. Later they found out, that wheat and maize do not have significant differences in providing nutrition. It reminds me of the story of tomatoes, a poisonous fruit that causes death turns out is the using of lead-rich plates. From another aspect, the government wants to address the problem of inefficient Indigenous workers in factories and ascribe the causes to wrong food choices. However, the truth is the government failed to convert their thoughts of the industrialized world. According to the article, Indigenous people at that stage didn’t have any ambition for money which was far different from their cultural value.
It triggers me to think about what is “modern” economy and what is the appropriate way to create a society which could integrate Indigenous and settlers as well as development. The main reason is the unequal tie between former colonizers and the Indigenous. The case of South Africa shows the relationship. The apartheid was definitely not the right way but after the reconciliation both South Africa’s economy and safety decreased. The structural reason behind this is some legacy of apartheid exacerbates social inequality, however, people usually consider it as “their” problems, rather than seeking solutions and ignoring what the former colonizers did before.
In contrast, a positive policy emerges in the form of José Vasconcelos’s rural schooling idea. This program not only eliminated illiteracy but also solidified Spanish as the official language, significantly enhancing the overall educational quality of Mexico’s population. The ripple effects of this initiative extended to the later 1960s, marking a period known as the “Mexico Miracle,” characterized by sustained economic growth and development.
Hello Damon, I really liked how in your blog post you classified wheat, corn, and rice as race classifications, I thought that was a spectacular idea! I had also never heard of the story that depicts tomatoes as a poisonous fruit that causes death. I’m glad I never heard that story because tomatoes are one of my favorite foods. You’re contribution of multiple different examples like the tomato story, the indigenous perspective and the case of South Africa that help round the Tortilla Discourse making it more understandable. Pointing out the positives such as the policy of the rural schools was also a reminder how impactful the Tortilla Discourse was for the spread of the Spanish language and the spread of knowledge (even if it may have been influenced by colonization) you make a good point that it lead to more economic growth and “development.”
~Sofia
Your post discusses the Tortilla Discourse in Mexico, when the government favored European food over local options like maize tortillas. It caused unfair ideas about races and wrong beliefs about food. You compared it to misunderstandings, like the mistaken belief that tomatoes were poisonous due to plates they were served on. The government blamed Indigenous people for factory problems, but it was more about culture. You also mentioned South Africa’s struggles after apartheid and a positive program in Mexico improving education. Overall, your ideas highlight the impact of past decisions and the importance of good education for a better future.Thanks Damon!