Blogs

I found this weeks topic very thought provoking. I feel as though the closer we get in terms of time... read full post >>

I was shocked by how incredibly positive and obviously biased Creelman’s article was. It seemed less like an objective article written by an American journalist about the leader of a foreign country than a propaganda piece written by a dictator about himself to convince his country and the world of how amazing he was. The […] read full post >>

Each week we are delving further into the next stages of the development of Latin America into what we know it as today in 2019. The readings and videos were very interesting this week particularly because they explained a new step of modernity in Latin America. As Dawson said in the video, groups found themselvesContinue reading "Week 7: A ‘Modern’ Prison" read full post >>

Mexican revolutionary leader Emiliano Zapata was born in the small rural town of Anenecuilco in the state of Morelos in 1879 and was directly affected by discriminatory and capitalist policies since Porfirio Díaz came to power before Zapata was born in 1877. Having grown up as a paisano in a Mexico that prioritized the rights …

Continue reading "“Tierra Y Libertad”: Who’s Revolution Is It Anyway?"

read full post >>

I remember that, in one class, Jon said that Latin America has more influence on global issues and development than most people think. The truth is Latin America made industrialism possible in the Northern hemisphere. The Noth needed resources that Latin America had and “[i]n return they promised a range of highly desired manufacturers, includingContinue reading "Week 7: The Export Boom in Modernity" read full post >>

James Creelman’s description of Porfino Diaz is overwhelmingly positive, as he opens his excerpt with a description of Diaz’s facial features and. Initially, I thought that the primary source was a piece of romance literature about Mexico because of the beauty that is depicted of the landscape and Diaz. However, it seems that Creelman is […] read full post >>

In this week's reading, I extremely enjoyed Creelman's account of Porfirio Diaz. It was a refreshing outlook on a man I have studied in many other classes in my time here at UBC. In this blog post, I want to shine a light on the correlation between thi... read full post >>

In this week's reading, I extremely enjoyed Creelman's account of Porfirio Diaz. It was a refreshing outlook on a man I have studied in many other classes in my time here at UBC. In this blog post, I want to shine a light on the correlation between thi... read full post >>

I think this primary source was the most interesting yet for me to read. Having always thought of Díaz as a violent dictator, it was really fascinating to see an American account of how he was the democratic ideal. There were a few spots in the article that I found particularly compelling.

The first was how Díaz referred to an opposing political party as "enemies." It seemed so obvious to me at this moment that he was incredibly disingenuous about his political processes. Democratic discourse is not a question of enemies but rather fair opposition. In light of the fact that he rigged the election against Madero in 1910. The second was the American sentiment that saturated the piece. As an American myself, there is often this sort of trope of someone who starts from nowhere and then picks himself up and becomes wealthy. I think the idea that Díaz came from little and was able to become the father of modernization in Mexico was particularly consumable to an American audience. The third observation was how little the reporter reacted to the unjust killings of various individuals who were seen as threats to the state. I guess it just goes to show how superficial ideas of Díaz's democracy were. Democracy was about modernization rather than rights.

In my history of Mexico class, there are some students from Mexico and also more broadly other Latin American countries. In one of our lectures about Díaz, they mentioned a changing perception of him as a cultural figure. In the past, he was seen as a villain due to the rampant corruption and violence in his regime, yet there is a new wave of people who are acknowledging and celebrating his work as the modernizer of the country. In this way, the situation sort of reminds me of modern-day politics in the United States. Do people prioritize the economy over human rights? It seems more and more that the first is elevated as a measure of success for a country.

I am not surprised that the American journalist painted such a rosy and romantic image of Porfirio Díaz. The United States frequently uses democracy as a guise for violence and destabilization in various countries. The interview was likely tainted by trade deals and economic ties between the United States and Mexico. As long as countries in Latin America satisfied American desires for production they were left alone. read full post >>

I think this primary source was the most interesting yet for me to read. Having always thought of Díaz as a violent dictator, it was really fascinating to see an American account of how he was the democratic ideal. There were a few spots in the articl... read full post >>