Revolution: attempt to shape a view of the past that organizes power in the present and making claims on the meaning of those events. With regard to Latin America people say that the revolution never really ended.
The video talks about the 3 major components of revolution. There was people like the Diaz’s that benefited from the power and economic advantages that were happening. Another ethos was the revolution of the Serrano- the frontiers- people that lived a free life in the Mexican state and had seen their life transform because of the modernity that had happened. For them, this was freedom, and freedom of authority. The last group was the Agrarian: mostly indigenous people living in central and southern Mexico who’s land was illegally taken from them.
The concept of who won the revolution is very difficult to say some people won land and some walked with nothing at all. I found it very interesting to hear what Dawson said about revolution and how the youngest were usually the ones to survive and they had been followers, not leaders. So at that particular time, it was better to be a follower than a leader which is ironic. One thing that really struck me was when Dawson talked about the phenomenon that nobody really wins a revolution, you can win a war but never a revolution.
The claim of “liberty and land never go away” I discovered was extremely important. The 2 icons: Wachovia and Zapata. The fights between the Zapatistas and the Agrarians got me thinking about the world today and how it would be if people asked for their lands back and fought for their lands back. For one- would we be on the Musqueam lands, secondly would war like Israeli/Palestinian conflicts would be further amplified?
The reading of Signs of Crisis in a Gilded Age talks about the struggles that people faced whilst trying to gain some type of modernization. When Dawson talks about this he talks about how it was beneficial in some respects but similarly- people do not realise about all the suffering that took place- it was unstable, violent and a struggle despite the fact that it was an “economic boom”
Posted in Blogs, Week 8 | Tagged with Crisis, Dawson, Diaz, economic boom, revolution, serrano, wachovia, Zapata
Revolution: attempt to shape a view of the past that organizes power in the present and making claims on the meaning of those events. With regard to Latin America people say that the revolution never really ended.
The video talks about the 3 major components of revolution. There was people like the Diaz’s that benefited from the power and economic advantages that were happening. Another ethos was the revolution of the Serrano- the frontiers- people that lived a free life in the Mexican state and had seen their life transform because of the modernity that had happened. For them, this was freedom, and freedom of authority. The last group was the Agrarian: mostly indigenous people living in central and southern Mexico who’s land was illegally taken from them.
The concept of who won the revolution is very difficult to say some people won land and some walked with nothing at all. I found it very interesting to hear what Dawson said about revolution and how the youngest were usually the ones to survive and they had been followers, not leaders. So at that particular time, it was better to be a follower than a leader which is ironic. One thing that really struck me was when Dawson talked about the phenomenon that nobody really wins a revolution, you can win a war but never a revolution.
The claim of “liberty and land never go away” I discovered was extremely important. The 2 icons: Wachovia and Zapata. The fights between the Zapatistas and the Agrarians got me thinking about the world today and how it would be if people asked for their lands back and fought for their lands back. For one- would we be on the Musqueam lands, secondly would war like Israeli/Palestinian conflicts would be further amplified?
The reading of Signs of Crisis in a Gilded Age talks about the struggles that people faced whilst trying to gain some type of modernization. When Dawson talks about this he talks about how it was beneficial in some respects but similarly- people do not realise about all the suffering that took place- it was unstable, violent and a struggle despite the fact that it was an “economic boom”
Posted in Blogs, Week 8 | Tagged with Crisis, Dawson, Diaz, economic boom, revolution, serrano, wachovia, Zapata
Revolution: attempt to shape a view of the past that organizes power in the present and making claims on the meaning of those events. With regard to Latin America people say that the revolution never really ended.
The video talks about the 3 major components of revolution. There was people like the Diaz’s that benefited from the power and economic advantages that were happening. Another ethos was the revolution of the Serrano- the frontiers- people that lived a free life in the Mexican state and had seen their life transform because of the modernity that had happened. For them, this was freedom, and freedom of authority. The last group was the Agrarian: mostly indigenous people living in central and southern Mexico who’s land was illegally taken from them.
The concept of who won the revolution is very difficult to say some people won land and some walked with nothing at all. I found it very interesting to hear what Dawson said about revolution and how the youngest were usually the ones to survive and they had been followers, not leaders. So at that particular time, it was better to be a follower than a leader which is ironic. One thing that really struck me was when Dawson talked about the phenomenon that nobody really wins a revolution, you can win a war but never a revolution.
The claim of “liberty and land never go away” I discovered was extremely important. The 2 icons: Wachovia and Zapata. The fights between the Zapatistas and the Agrarians got me thinking about the world today and how it would be if people asked for their lands back and fought for their lands back. For one- would we be on the Musqueam lands, secondly would war like Israeli/Palestinian conflicts would be further amplified?
The reading of Signs of Crisis in a Gilded Age talks about the struggles that people faced whilst trying to gain some type of modernization. When Dawson talks about this he talks about how it was beneficial in some respects but similarly- people do not realise about all the suffering that took place- it was unstable, violent and a struggle despite the fact that it was an “economic boom”
Posted in Blogs, Week 8 | Tagged with Crisis, Dawson, Diaz, economic boom, revolution, serrano, wachovia, Zapata
Revolution: attempt to shape a view of the past that organizes power in the present and making claims on the meaning of those events. With regard to Latin America people say that the revolution never really ended.
The video talks about the 3 major components of revolution. There was people like the Diaz’s that benefited from the power and economic advantages that were happening. Another ethos was the revolution of the Serrano- the frontiers- people that lived a free life in the Mexican state and had seen their life transform because of the modernity that had happened. For them, this was freedom, and freedom of authority. The last group was the Agrarian: mostly indigenous people living in central and southern Mexico who’s land was illegally taken from them.
The concept of who won the revolution is very difficult to say some people won land and some walked with nothing at all. I found it very interesting to hear what Dawson said about revolution and how the youngest were usually the ones to survive and they had been followers, not leaders. So at that particular time, it was better to be a follower than a leader which is ironic. One thing that really struck me was when Dawson talked about the phenomenon that nobody really wins a revolution, you can win a war but never a revolution.
The claim of “liberty and land never go away” I discovered was extremely important. The 2 icons: Wachovia and Zapata. The fights between the Zapatistas and the Agrarians got me thinking about the world today and how it would be if people asked for their lands back and fought for their lands back. For one- would we be on the Musqueam lands, secondly would war like Israeli/Palestinian conflicts would be further amplified?
The reading of Signs of Crisis in a Gilded Age talks about the struggles that people faced whilst trying to gain some type of modernization. When Dawson talks about this he talks about how it was beneficial in some respects but similarly- people do not realise about all the suffering that took place- it was unstable, violent and a struggle despite the fact that it was an “economic boom”
Posted in Blogs, Week 8 | Tagged with Crisis, Dawson, Diaz, economic boom, revolution, serrano, wachovia, Zapata
This week’s lecture was one of the most interesting ones for me. During my childhood I was taught about Porfirio Diaz and his “iron fist” rule through school. However, when I think of Mexico at that time my mind immediately goes to the Mexican Revolution. Looking back on it now, it seems very logical that […]
Posted in Blogs | Tagged with innovation, modernization, Porfirio Díaz, revolution
This weeks content focused on the idea of modernity Latin American. Modernity in Latin America and a difficult concept that continues to be debated today. As such a broad idea, it seems to tie into many subjects that we have covered so far in this course. It can be thought of in the context of […]
Posted in Blogs, Week 7 | Tagged with democracy, dictator, Mexico, modernization, Porfirio Díaz, Railroads, revolution
This weeks content focused on the idea of modernity Latin American. Modernity in Latin America and a difficult concept that continues to be debated today. As such a broad idea, it seems to tie into many subjects that we have covered so far in this course. It can be thought of in the context of […]
Posted in Blogs, Week 7 | Tagged with democracy, dictator, Mexico, modernization, Porfirio Díaz, Railroads, revolution
What was most impressive to me this week was the power that was given to the one article by the journalist, James Creelman, after his interview with Porfirio Diaz. Written in 1908, just two years before the Mexican Revolution, Creelman … Continue reading →
Posted in Blogs, Week 7 | Tagged with Creelman, democracy, Diaz, Mexico, modernity, revolution