Master Study Guide LAS200Y1.docx

17 Pages
Unlock Document

Latin American Studies
Victor Rivas

Master Study Guide LAS200Y1 2 Semester *Thanks to all those who contributed and good Luck! Francis Scherer Terms with historical and cultural support: th 26 of July: History: the date of an assault planned by the rebellion lead by Fidel Castro on the Moncada barracks with purpose of eventually overthrowing Batista. However this attack failed and Castro was incarcerated until 1955. During this time He is gloriously quoted with saying “ History will absolve me” in references to his desires to eventually lead the Cuban people. This date eventually became the title of the gorilla movement lead by Castro and Che Greuvera which lead to the topple of the Bastia government. The July 26 movement. Significance: - The July 26 movement was supported by gorilla troops in the sierra, and by urban resistance lead by Frank País. Support gathered behind the leader Castro mainly from University students and other believers and eventually joined with the communist arty in Cuba, which provided middle class support in the urban sector. The US even began to support Castro in the toppling of Batista and even established an arms embargo on Cuba in March 1958. - The cultural significance of the date July 26 resides in the naming of the movement that eventually led to the over through of Bastista and the instatement of Castro the leader of the Cuban people. This also lead to the communist revolution in Cuba and many other historical events such as the Cuban Missile crisis and events of the Cold war. As well as effecting trade and travel industries with the US and other countries in the world. - Also notable are the establishments of certain policies related directly to the Castro administration via the US. For example: alterations to the Good Neighbour policy, and trade and travel embargos with Cuba because of its ties to communist Russia - Also the bay of pig was a result of the Cuban exiles just as a side note. Salvador Allende: History: Chilean leader circa 1970 presidential election in Chile. Considered to be one of the first Marxist leaders that resulted from an open election. One of the co-founders of the Chilean socialist party. Not elected to presidency until his 4 attempt under the ‘Popular Unity Party’ [a combination of the socialist and communist parties and splinter groups of the radicals and the Christian Democrats]. However the narrow electoral results lead to almost immediate instability. Leading to the eventual coup d’état lead by General Pinochet, who was an appointed general by Allende. The election of a Marxist socialist was an immediate threat to the ‘backyard’ of the USA, and has lead to conspiracies about the US involvement in Plan Condor and other political and economic changes incurred by Chile post coup. Allende had desires to nationalize industries within Chile [ie: copper industry] in order to cut its dependence on the US and foreign capital investments. Significance: The election of Allende was the catalyst to the coup d’état of General Pinochet and a return to free-market capitalism. This was a showcase of not only the elite class and its power but the overall global control and persuasion of he power residing in the US. - Also this led to the involvement of he Chicago Boys and the establishment of the “Economic Miracle” a Milton Friedman idea, and the reconnection with the US market place and ideals. - This was a primary attempt at equality and economic redistribution - By nationalizing previously established foreign business Allende aggravated the US, which countered with an invisible blockade, cutting loans and funding and portions of trade with Chile and its socialist government. Plan Condor: History: The supposed extermination and brutal treatment of opposition memebres to Latin American political movements. Assigned to the leadership of Pinochet in Chile circa 1973-74, it is proposed that there are discovered documented attempts of Latin American Political leaders, namely Pinochet, to eliminate any political opposition with in their respective countries. There is a lot of controversy shadowing these events because of the involvement of the “Truth Commission” [funded and trained by the US] about its authenticity. In the case of Chile, the Truth Commission was put in place to shed light on the actions carried out by the Chilean government, lead by General Pinochet, under the veil of ‘Plan Condor’. It was believed that ‘Plan Condor’ was created to eliminate, by any means, the subversive movement opposing Pinochet and threating the economic recovery of Chile at the time. While it is alleged that ‘Plan Condor’ was to blame for the loss of some three thousand lives, there has yet to be any substantial proof of either Pinochet’s involvement or recovery of even one of the three thousand bodies. Significance: Significant because it has triggered many things including conspiracies regarding the involvement of the US. Can be credited for the success or failure of the Pinochet administration [depending on how you view things]. - Also significant because of its validity or lack there of and how the interpretation has changed the view of Pinochet’s leadership and its effectiveness. - Plan Condor was a massive Human Rights violation that is punishable by the world court system - Plan Condor is suspect because of the political and economic change and how it favored the US and its markets. Since Plan Condor was a suppressive action taken towards any opposition or threat to the drastic political and economic change that was taking place at that time Good Neighbour Policy: History: The Good Neighbor policy was the foreign policy of the administration of United States President Franklin Roosevelt, circa 1933, toward the countries of Latin America. While it rule became effective during Franklin Roosevelt's presidency, it was Hoover who paved the way for this policy. Hoover also coined the term ‘Good Neighbor’. Its main principle was that of non-intervention and non- interference in the domestic affairs of Latin America. It also reinforced the idea that the United States would be a “good neighbor” and engage in reciprocal exchanges with Latin American countries. Overall, the Roosevelt administration expected that this new policy would create new economic opportunities in the form of reciprocal trade agreements and reassert the influence of the United States in Latin America; however, many Latin American governments were not convinced. Significance: Gives an understanding of pre cold war relations between the US and Latin American countries regardless of their political affiliation. Also demonstrates the capitalist intent and actions of the US. - Representative of free-market trade agreements and US economic principals and their influence on the rest of the world - Showed just how flexible policy can be when there is an interoperated threat to the US - Was created after the Monroe Doctrine Monroe Doctrine: History: The Monroe Doctrine was a policy of the United States introduced on December 2, 1823. It stated that further efforts by European nations to colonize land or interfere with states in North or South America would be viewed as acts of aggression, requiring U.S. intervention. The US also agreed in this Doctrine that they would not interfere with Europe in any way. Significance: This was created at the time when almost all Latin American countries were establishing their independence from European, namely Spanish and French rule. - This can also be viewed as an investment in economics and political economy by the US. By establishing good relations and providing protection from their imperialist counterparts the US was establishing relationships of trade gains. This also in a way established control via the US over Latin America at the time. - Because the US lacked a creditable army at the time of this Doctrine, it was thus largely discredited internationally. However the British also support this doctrine because of the trade gains that it would experience and thus it was adhered to internationally. - Lead to the Big Brother policy which was basically the opening of markets to the US General Pinochet: History: Was an army general in 1972-72 in Chile until he stage a coup d’état over throwing president Allende in September 11 1973 and becoming the dictator of Chile. Later transferring power democratically to president Aylwin. He has been credited with the economic recover of Chile by reverting back to the free-market capitalism of the US under the advisement of the US trained Chicago Boys. This was considered by many to be the ‘Economic Miracle’ that Chile had been looking for during the economic depression of the late 60’s early 70’s. After his rule as dictator of Chile he remained in control of their arm and its military decisions thus maintaining some power over the Chilean political structure before he was arrested for human rights violations that resulted from the supposed ‘Plan Condor’. Significance: Credited with the economic miracle of Chile - Also was accused of human rights violations under plan condor resulting in the truth commission investigation - Creating belief in the connectivity to the US market place and economic structure with hopes of influencing the rest of Latin America. - Dictatorship with American flavour - During this time there were agreements made indebting Chile to the US through the IMF and its conditional loans - There was later a transition back to democracy but the interesting part is none of the policies really changed. The fundamental IPE and stayed the same, the title from dictator to president was the only real difference. Emiliano Zapata: History: He was a leading figure in the Mexican revolution in 1910 against president Porfirio Diaz. He commanded the Liberation army of the south. He is still widely respected and loved in Mexico today. Followers of Zapata are known as Zapatistas! He also represented similar ideas to Pancho Villa Significance: He deeply cared about land reform and redistribution. He allowed and promoted the value of women in his rebellion army and often the women fought alongside of the men and were able to rise in rank in his army. Coined the phrase “land and liberty” ; there is debate over whether Zapata and his followers were revolutionaries or bandits. Still he is considered a national hero that represents hope for the oppressed and underprivileged. CESAR CHAVEZ ( 1927-1993): Cesar was a Chicano, born in California to immigrants parents who worked on the farms like many other newly arrived illegal and legal Mexican immigrants to the U.S. - He was able to attend university but never completeled… he dropped out after a couple of years. -This man is a great figure because he represents the plight for respect and fair treatment for Latinos, and for farm workers. - He became a leader of the UNITED FARM WORKERS, funded in 1962, to fight for workers who were being exploited. He argued for their right to be unionized so that they would be able to negotiate better working conditions, treatment, and fair pay for the farm workers. - Eventually. His plight and the UFW became a charismatic movement, and Cesar was able to gather a large following of Latinos- Chicanos or not- to support his cause and carry on his efforts. -One of the biggest issues he faced was how to get across to the farmers, the people he was trying to fight for their rights, when they were the uneducated masses. For this, he was able to find great and creative people who helped break down those barriers of communication, starting with communicating through corridos, the style of song charged with political activism. VICTOR JARA (193201973) This man is an example of an artist who demonstrated political commitment. He was a songwriter and a singer and he played many corridos during the times of the War and the Allende/Pinochet coup in Chile, (late 1960s, early 1970s). Many of his songs spoke about reform, land redistribution, and liberty; he created La Cancion Nueva”. His ideas were very sided with the socialist plans that Allende had for the country, something that went very against the ideas and the Pinochet coup and the anti- communist doctrine of the U.S at the time. Anything that seemed slightly leftist was considered a threat, and so Jara’s songs and expressions were regarded by many of Pinochet’s coups in that light. Sadly, he was captured by the Allandimientos in Chile, which was when the police or the people backing Pinochet’s coups would break into people’s home and hurt or capture anyone who they affiliated with “communism” or “socialism”, basically anything unlike Pinochet. He was taken to the Chilean national stadium as a prisoner and never left alive. He was killed in 1973, is whole body was actually never recovered. EZLN (-1994) This is a group that has since 1994 declared war Against Mexico. They have outright denied any political alignment and retain their distinctiveness and solidarity in the importance of indigenous Mayan Beliefs and in Zapatismo thought. The group takes its name after Emiliano Zapata, who was the leader of the Army of the South during the Mexican Revolutions that began in 1910. He was a revolutionary, and represented many indigenous and their cause. He fought for agrarian reforms and was very involved in discussions over such reforms and the justice of agrarian division during the revolutions. CARMEN MIRANDA Carmen Miranda was a Brazilian singer of European-descent who came to be part of the good neighbor policy with the U.S in the 1930s-50s, that is, trying to educate Americans about Latin American countries, customs, land, people, music and so forth, in a was that was amicable and user-friendly to them. For example, Miranda wore and sung to the style of the Afro-Brazilian culture, and yet she was no an Afro-Brazilian. This American representation and cultural expression of Latin America was very blotched and a misrepresentation at that. People were not able to attain a proper picture and understanding of the realities in Latin America because of what was projected through the cultural expressions in songs and movies and actors that were all part of the Good neighbor policy. This relates to the idea of interpellation: of the attempt of the government to put out its own signs and meanings in society represented through different institutions, be it the churches, the school, or cultural expressions such as in the radio or the media. It brings light to the fragility of representing something that is not your own, and of the biases and misrepresentation that can occur. EL-VEZ: ROBERT LOPEZ (1960-) He is known as the Mexican Elvis, whose career took off around the late 1980s. He uses the imitation of a great American pop icon, Elvis, and has created a transcultural act, using Elvis inspired music and dress and infusing that with political subject matter and awareness in favour of issues pertaining to Latinos. As a Chicano- a Mexican-American- he has taken up the cause of political activism for this group. He is more than an artist, he is a political activism, and it shows in every one of his shows and his lyrics. He speaks about Chicano issues, -be it inequality, racism, unfair work treatment- gang violence, Mexican history, influential Chicano figures such as Cesar Chavez, immigrants and many other related topics to Latinos in the North. This is an example of cultural hybridity, where he takes things from boths sides to creats a powerful transcultural act that is relatable and attractive to both cultures. By performing a transcultural act, he is able to break down barriers that may otherwise existed and may have prevented him from reaching out to the other half of his audience. It is an idea of taking the powerful cultural phenomenons of the North and infusing them with the Latino flavor of the music but also with social and political activism to bring awareness to the many issues Latinos are facing. LUIS VALDES (1940-) Luis Valdes became a follower of Cesar Chavez and became involved in the UFW n 1965, 3 years after it was founded. He is known as the ideological father of the public relations campaign, that is, he is credited for being able to break down communication barriers to the masses of the uneducated in a way no one had done previously regarding the plight for exploited farmers. He is the creator and father of the TEATRO CAMPESINO. This theatre was made up of short stories with humour and strong messages to get the farmers to understand what the UFW union was about, what they were fighting for, and why they should support this movement and cause. It became a very efficient and successful way of communicating with the masses of farmers, as they would set up truck- stages and act out certain scenarios to convey different messages: such as unfair treatment by the farm patrons, long hours, improper pay and so forth. Valdez brought the concept of theatre from Spain, the idea of passion plays, and infused them ( ANTOTHER CULTURAL HYBRID) with the ways of the Aztecs and how they represented their ideas also through theatre, and finally added to Latino farm workers realities and issues to his theatre. This is an important example of cultural hybridity because he once again was able to break down barriers, draw attention to his cause from many ‘classes ‘ of people, because of his ability to attract them through the different cultural aspects infused in his theatre, He is now a professor of theatre at the University of California. Francisco Madero - Mexico was led the dictator President Porfirio Diaz, who had been in power since 1876 - Though responsible for modernizing Mexico, anyone who opposed him was not allowed to voice their opinions and were silenced. - In 1910, elections were held and Madero ran against Diaz’s dictatorship, and was supported by many. - Diaz won the election, however this sparked the revolution. - Madero returned from the states to begin the revolution, in 1911 Madero along with a large army led an attack on the federal garrison of Casas Grandes. The attack failed, but it made northern rebel like Orozco acknowledge Madero as a leader of the revolution. - Madero and Pancho Villa had met and started working together to set in motion the revolution in Mexico City. - After much civil unrest and revolutionary attacks Diaz negotiated surrender with Madero, and Madero became president in 1911. - However, Madero was not a true revolutionist and when president worked on maintaining the power structure left by Diaz, which greatly upset the other revolutionary fighters. - -- - - Madero also had enemies on the other side with General Victoriano Huerto, who wanted to remove Madero - In 1913, Madero was arrested and executed by Huerta. - Francisco Madero was the spark that started the revolution through the removal of Diaz. Augusto Sandino  Sandino was the leader of the rebel movement in Nicaragua between 1927 and 1933 against Jose Maria Moncada and Somoza, who was put in power by the United States.  Sandino and his supporters, Sandinistas, continued to fight the guerilla war against the US intervention in government.  Eventually in 1933, the US left Nicaragua, and Sandino began to negotiate the removal of the National guard, which he still felt was being controlled by the US.  Somoza gave orders to have Sandinista arrested and killed by the National Guard. After his execution the National Guard began breaking down the Sandinistas, which they accomplished after a month.  Somoza went on to become the leader and establish his dictatorship.  Sandino is regarded as a national hero and had left a legacy for future politicians.  The formation of the Sandinista National Liberation Front - inspired his Sandinistas to take down Anastasio Somoza Debayle – Leading to the Nicaraguan Revolution o 1975- Somoza Debayle tried to break down Sandinistas o however, Sandinistas were supported by other prominent political leaders and by President Jimmy Carter, who had previously withdrew support for Somoza because of Human right issues Pancho Villa  Apart of the Mexican Revolution.  After Madero’s assignation, Pancho Villa continues fighting for the Mexican revolution, mainly in the North of Mexico.  Villa focused on advocating for land reform and the poor, and against the rich/ power structure, which is why he was compared to a Robin Hood-like figure.  Villa became known as a bandit fighting for the revolution, and joined Madero’s army.  When Madero was put in power, Orozco was upset about how little he was involved in the new government and began forming a counter-army against Madero.  Villa, a supporter of Madero, decided to defend him, there was another general who was defending Madero as well named General Huerta. Huerta and Villa did not agree well with each other and Huerta was able to have Villa imprisoned and sentenced to death.  General Huerta had ended up betraying and assassinating Madero.  Fortunately, Pancho Villa had escaped imprisonment and now began leading the army against Huerta.  Pancho Villa also was apart of the f
More Less

Related notes for LAS200H1

Log In


Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.